Artifacts are here: http://s.apache.org/lusolr40rc0

Thanks,
Robert

--
lucidworks.com

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Sweet, thanks!

Mark

On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 12:11 AM, Robert Muir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Artifacts are here: http://s.apache.org/lusolr40rc0
>
> Thanks,
> Robert
>
> --
> lucidworks.com
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>

--
- Mark

---------------------------------------------------------------------

+1, smoke tester is happy on Ubuntu 12.04.

Mike McCandless

http://blog.mikemccandless.com

On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 12:11 AM, Robert Muir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Artifacts are here: http://s.apache.org/lusolr40rc0
>
> Thanks,
> Robert
>
> --
> lucidworks.com
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------

+1, Smoker tester also ran successfully on my machine (Ubuntu 12.04.1)

Martijn

On 24 September 2012 14:48, Michael McCandless
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> +1, smoke tester is happy on Ubuntu 12.04.
>
> Mike McCandless
>
> http://blog.mikemccandless.com
>
> On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 12:11 AM, Robert Muir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Artifacts are here: http://s.apache.org/lusolr40rc0
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Robert
>>
>> --
>> lucidworks.com
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------

many nonsense in the javadocs with the previous release, which should get clean. as well as a clear package tree, that simplifies the usage and configuration.

I think the core of lucene is just about the algorithm of full text search, ha. besides are just for locale and administrating, ha.
it is important to use the plugin mechanism.
At 2012-09-24 12:11:33,"Robert Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Artifacts are here: http://s.apache.org/lusolr40rc0
>
>Thanks,
>Robert
>
>--
>lucidworks.com
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>

Hello秋水,

Rather than complaining about the javadocs, perhaps you could help by pointing out specific problems?

Or even better, create JIRA issues and provide patches: http://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/HowToContribute

Steve

From: 秋水 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, September 24, 2012 10:19 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re:VOTE: release 4.0

many nonsense in the javadocs with the previous release, which should get clean. as well as a clear package tree, that simplifies the usage and configuration.

I think the core of lucene is just about the algorithm of full text search, ha. besides are just for locale and administrating, ha.
it is important to use the plugin mechanism.

At 2012-09-24 12:11:33,"Robert Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:

>Artifacts are here: http://s.apache.org/lusolr40rc0

>

>Thanks,

>Robert

>

>--

>lucidworks.com

>

>---------------------------------------------------------------------

>To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

>For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

>

On Mon, 2012-09-24 at 06:11 +0200, Robert Muir wrote:
> Artifacts are here: http://s.apache.org/lusolr40rc0

Sorry to interrupt as a non-voter, but I am afraid that
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-3875 might be a blocker for
4.0. Maybe a veteran could take a quick look?

- Toke Eskildsen, State and University Library, Denmark
---------------------------------------------------------------------

ok
think about it as you suggest
在 2012-09-24 22:29:34，"Steven A Rowe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 写道：
Hello秋水,

 

Rather than complaining about the javadocs, perhaps you could help by pointing out specific problems?

 

Or even better, create JIRA issues and provide patches: http://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/HowToContribute

 

Steve

 

From:秋水 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, September 24, 2012 10:19 AM
To:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re:VOTE: release 4.0

 

many nonsense in the javadocs with the previous release, which should get clean. as well as a clear package tree, that simplifies the usage and configuration.

I think the core of lucene is just about the algorithm of full text search, ha. besides are just for locale and administrating, ha.
it is important to use the plugin mechanism.

At 2012-09-24 12:11:33,"Robert Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Artifacts are here: http://s.apache.org/lusolr40rc0
>
>Thanks,
>Robert
>
>--
>lucidworks.com
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>

 

Somebody is going to need to make a call on whether support for Solr Admin
UI in IE 9 is required for 4.0 release. See SOLR-3876.

https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-3876

I marked it only as critical, for now.

-- Jack Krupansky

-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Muir
Sent: Monday, September 24, 2012 12:11 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: VOTE: release 4.0

Artifacts are here: http://s.apache.org/lusolr40rc0

Thanks,
Robert

--
lucidworks.com

---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------

+1 smoke test is happy. I integrated it in my 4.0 apps and ran tests,
everything looks good.

thanks robert for all the hard work!

On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 4:04 PM, Martijn v Groningen
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> +1, Smoker tester also ran successfully on my machine (Ubuntu 12.04.1)
>
> Martijn
>
> On 24 September 2012 14:48, Michael McCandless
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> +1, smoke tester is happy on Ubuntu 12.04.
>>
>> Mike McCandless
>>
>> http://blog.mikemccandless.com
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 12:11 AM, Robert Muir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> Artifacts are here: http://s.apache.org/lusolr40rc0
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Robert
>>>
>>> --
>>> lucidworks.com
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------

+1, I ran my usual workflow on Solr, indexing example content and poking around.  

I did notice one issue in the /browse UI, and haven't researched when this happened, but after indexing the the Solr example docs (java -jar post.jar *.xml) I got this in the UI:

   In Stock: true
   jEOE: software search

That jEOE should be "Cat" or "Category" instead.  I'll open a JIRA.  Cosmetic, though confusing.

Erik
On Sep 23, 2012, at 21:11 , Robert Muir wrote:

> Artifacts are here: http://s.apache.org/lusolr40rc0
>
> Thanks,
> Robert
>
> --
> lucidworks.com
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Running smokeTestRelease.py on Win7+Cygwin, I can't get past the Solr example test under Java7.

I ran the smoke tester three times using Oracle v1.7.0_01 64-bit, and then two times using Oracle v1.7.0_07 64-bit.  Four out of the five runs failed on the first Java7 Solr example test (from the unpacked .tgz distribution), while one run passed the .tgz Solr example test, but then failed on the .zip Solr example test.

All Java6 (v1.6.0_34) Solr example test runs always pass for me.

Here's the output from the most recent attempt - below I also have included the corresponding solr-example.log:

-----
Test Solr...
  test basics...
  get KEYS
    0.1 MB
  download apache-solr-4.0.0-src.tgz...
    29.8 MB
    verify md5/sha1 digests
    verify sig
      GPG: gpg: WARNING: using insecure memory!
    verify trust
      GPG: gpg: WARNING: using insecure memory!
      GPG: gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature!
  download apache-solr-4.0.0.tgz...
    102.8 MB
    verify md5/sha1 digests
    verify sig
      GPG: gpg: WARNING: using insecure memory!
    verify trust
      GPG: gpg: WARNING: using insecure memory!
      GPG: gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature!
  download apache-solr-4.0.0.zip...
    107.0 MB
    verify md5/sha1 digests
    verify sig
      GPG: gpg: WARNING: using insecure memory!
    verify trust
      GPG: gpg: WARNING: using insecure memory!
      GPG: gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature!
    unpack apache-solr-4.0.0.tgz...
    test solr example w/ Java 6...
      start Solr instance (log=/home/sarowe/temp/tmpDir/unpack/apache-solr-4.0.0/solr-example.log)...
      startup done
      test utf8...
      index example docs...
      run query...
      stop server (SIGINT)...
    test solr example w/ Java 7...
      start Solr instance (log=/home/sarowe/temp/tmpDir/unpack/apache-solr-4.0.0/solr-example.log)...
      startup done
      test utf8...
      index example docs...
      run query...
FAILED: response is:
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<response>
<lst name="responseHeader"><int name="status">0</int><int name="QTime">0</int><lst name="params"><str name="q">video</str></lst></lst><result name="response" numFound="0" start="0"></result>
</response>

      stop server (SIGINT)...
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 1121, in <module>
  File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 1071, in main
  File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 1113, in smokeTest
  File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 424, in unpack
  File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 540, in verifyUnpacked
  File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 612, in testSolrExample
RuntimeError: query on solr example instance failed
-----
And the solr-example.log:

-----
2012-09-24 14:08:56.153:INFO:oejs.Server:jetty-8.1.2.v20120308
2012-09-24 14:08:56.166:INFO:oejdp.ScanningAppProvider:Deployment monitor C:\cygwin\home\sarowe\temp\tmpDir\unpack\apache-solr-4.0.0\example\contexts at interval 0
2012-09-24 14:08:56.171:INFO:oejd.DeploymentManager:Deployable added: C:\cygwin\home\sarowe\temp\tmpDir\unpack\apache-solr-4.0.0\example\contexts\solr.xml
2012-09-24 14:08:56.719:INFO:oejw.StandardDescriptorProcessor:NO JSP Support for /solr, did not find org.apache.jasper.servlet.JspServlet
2012-09-24 14:08:56.737:INFO:oejsh.ContextHandler:started o.e.j.w.WebAppContext{/solr,file:/C:/cygwin/home/sarowe/temp/tmpDir/unpack/apache-solr-4.0.0/example/solr-webapp/webapp/},C:\cygwin\home\sarowe\temp\tmpDir\unpack\apache-solr-4.0.0\example/webapps/solr.war
2012-09-24 14:08:56.737:INFO:oejsh.ContextHandler:started o.e.j.w.WebAppContext{/solr,file:/C:/cygwin/home/sarowe/temp/tmpDir/unpack/apache-solr-4.0.0/example/solr-webapp/webapp/},C:\cygwin\home\sarowe\temp\tmpDir\unpack\apache-solr-4.0.0\example/webapps/solr.war
Sep 24, 2012 2:08:56 PM org.apache.solr.core.SolrResourceLoader locateSolrHome
INFO: JNDI not configured for solr (NoInitialContextEx)
Sep 24, 2012 2:08:56 PM org.apache.solr.core.SolrResourceLoader locateSolrHome
INFO: solr home defaulted to 'solr/' (could not find system property or JNDI)
Sep 24, 2012 2:08:56 PM org.apache.solr.core.SolrResourceLoader <init>
INFO: new SolrResourceLoader for deduced Solr Home: 'solr/'
Sep 24, 2012 2:08:56 PM org.apache.solr.servlet.SolrDispatchFilter init
INFO: SolrDispatchFilter.init()
Sep 24, 2012 2:08:56 PM org.apache.solr.core.SolrResourceLoader locateSolrHome
INFO: JNDI not configured for solr (NoInitialContextEx)
Sep 24, 2012 2:08:56 PM org.apache.solr.core.SolrResourceLoader locateSolrHome
INFO: solr home defaulted to 'solr/' (could not find system property or JNDI)
Sep 24, 2012 2:08:56 PM org.apache.solr.core.CoreContainer$Initializer initialize
INFO: looking for solr.xml: C:\cygwin\home\sarowe\temp\tmpDir\unpack\apache-solr-4.0.0\example\solr\solr.xml
Sep 24, 2012 2:08:56 PM org.apache.solr.core.CoreContainer <init>
INFO: New CoreContainer 1612487865
Sep 24, 2012 2:08:56 PM org.apache.solr.core.CoreContainer load
INFO: Loading CoreContainer using Solr Home: 'solr/'
Sep 24, 2012 2:08:56 PM org.apache.solr.core.SolrResourceLoader <init>
INFO: new SolrResourceLoader for directory: 'solr/'
Sep 24, 2012 2:08:56 PM org.apache.solr.core.CoreContainer load
INFO: Registering Log Listener
Sep 24, 2012 2:08:56 PM org.apache.solr.core.CoreContainer create
INFO: Creating SolrCore 'collection1' using instanceDir: solr\collection1
Sep 24, 2012 2:08:56 PM org.apache.solr.core.SolrResourceLoader <init>
INFO: new SolrResourceLoader for directory: 'solr\collection1\'
Sep 24, 2012 2:08:56 PM org.apache.solr.core.SolrConfig initLibs
INFO: Adding specified lib dirs to ClassLoader
Sep 24, 2012 2:08:56 PM org.apache.solr.core.SolrResourceLoader replaceClassLoader
INFO: Adding 'file:/C:/cygwin/home/sarowe/temp/tmpDir/unpack/apache-solr-4.0.0/contrib/extraction/lib/apache-mime4j-core-0.7.2.jar' to classloader
Sep 24, 2

On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 2:26 PM, Steven A Rowe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Running smokeTestRelease.py on Win7+Cygwin, I can't get past the Solr example test under Java7.
>

I'm not really sure thats a reflection on this release candidate: I'm
not sure the smoke tester works on windows. I think you may have to
test manually.

--
lucidworks.com

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Wow; that looks like a serious issue to me.

-----
 Author: http://www.packtpub.com/apache-solr-3-enterprise-search-server/book
--
View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/VOTE-release-4-0-tp4009770p4009941.html
Sent from the Lucene - Java Developer mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Folks, it looks like there definitely should be a respin,
so please remember to back-port fixes that should go into 4.0 to the
4.0 branch in addition to the 4x branch.

-Yonik
http://lucidworks.com

---------------------------------------------------------------------

+1, If we do this, I would be happy to also fix the servlet-api.jar issue. If you want to add ecj-linter, I would also be happy, but that's not important, just nice to have!

-----
Uwe Schindler
H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen
http://www.thetaphi.de
eMail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Yonik
> Seeley
> Sent: Monday, September 24, 2012 11:39 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: VOTE: release 4.0
>
> Folks, it looks like there definitely should be a respin, so please remember to
> back-port fixes that should go into 4.0 to the
> 4.0 branch in addition to the 4x branch.
>
> -Yonik
> http://lucidworks.com
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional
> commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm voting for the respin as well. We should wait a brief time to let
any other issues surface I think though.

On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 5:58 PM, Uwe Schindler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> +1, If we do this, I would be happy to also fix the servlet-api.jar issue. If you want to add ecj-linter, I would also be happy, but that's not important, just nice to have!
>
> -----
> Uwe Schindler
> H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen
> http://www.thetaphi.de
> eMail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Yonik
>> Seeley
>> Sent: Monday, September 24, 2012 11:39 PM
>> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Subject: Re: VOTE: release 4.0
>>
>> Folks, it looks like there definitely should be a respin, so please remember to
>> back-port fixes that should go into 4.0 to the
>> 4.0 branch in addition to the 4x branch.
>>
>> -Yonik
>> http://lucidworks.com
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional
>> commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>

--
- Mark

---------------------------------------------------------------------

I think Roman is working on trying to coerce the linter into testing
that the .war file is correct. Maybe you can help him (python is hard
for me)?

As far as the ecj-linter, its technically a test: I don't object to it
being backported except for the fact that I would prefer we only do
what is minimal and necessary.

This is really important: we need to maintain stability. the release
branch shouldn't be a free-for-all, even for bugfixes.

On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 5:58 PM, Uwe Schindler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> +1, If we do this, I would be happy to also fix the servlet-api.jar issue. If you want to add ecj-linter, I would also be happy, but that's not important, just nice to have!
>
> -----
> Uwe Schindler
> H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen
> http://www.thetaphi.de
> eMail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Yonik
>> Seeley
>> Sent: Monday, September 24, 2012 11:39 PM
>> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Subject: Re: VOTE: release 4.0
>>
>> Folks, it looks like there definitely should be a respin, so please remember to
>> back-port fixes that should go into 4.0 to the
>> 4.0 branch in addition to the 4x branch.
>>
>> -Yonik
>> http://lucidworks.com
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional
>> commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>

--
lucidworks.com

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Well, if you want to save me from being embarrassed by a zillion
search installations trying the /browse handler and seeing my
initials in the output, respin this beast.

Fortunately, it looks like maybe I get covered by SOLR-3875  and
maybe SOLR-3879 being enough reasons for a re-spin <G>....
If so, SOLR-3880 is the fix for "jEOE" appearing in the /browse output.

Erick

On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 1:59 PM, Erik Hatcher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> +1, I ran my usual workflow on Solr, indexing example content and poking around.
>
> I did notice one issue in the /browse UI, and haven't researched when this happened, but after indexing the the Solr example docs (java -jar post.jar *.xml) I got this in the UI:
>
>    In Stock: true
>    jEOE: software search
>
> That jEOE should be "Cat" or "Category" instead.  I'll open a JIRA.  Cosmetic, though confusing.
>
>         Erik
>
>
> On Sep 23, 2012, at 21:11 , Robert Muir wrote:
>
>> Artifacts are here: http://s.apache.org/lusolr40rc0
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Robert
>>
>> --
>> lucidworks.com
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------

> I think Roman is working on trying to coerce the linter into testing that the .war
> file is correct. Maybe you can help him (python is hard for me)?

I would do this check with ANT, but with python it should be possible by doing a pexec on "unzip -l WARFILE | grep -v servlet-api"

> As far as the ecj-linter, its technically a test: I don't object to it being
> backported except for the fact that I would prefer we only do what is minimal
> and necessary.

As I said, I don't care, would be nice for later tests on this release branch with e.g. Jähnkins.

> This is really important: we need to maintain stability. the release branch
> shouldn't be a free-for-all, even for bugfixes.

In other Open Source projects, the stable release branch is closed down and only the RM has commit rights (e.g., PHP before it used to use GIT).

> On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 5:58 PM, Uwe Schindler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > +1, If we do this, I would be happy to also fix the servlet-api.jar issue. If you
> want to add ecj-linter, I would also be happy, but that's not important, just nice
> to have!
> >
> > -----
> > Uwe Schindler
> > H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen
> > http://www.thetaphi.de
> > eMail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Yonik
> >> Seeley
> >> Sent: Monday, September 24, 2012 11:39 PM
> >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> Subject: Re: VOTE: release 4.0
> >>
> >> Folks, it looks like there definitely should be a respin, so please
> >> remember to back-port fixes that should go into 4.0 to the
> >> 4.0 branch in addition to the 4x branch.
> >>
> >> -Yonik
> >> http://lucidworks.com
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For
> >> additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For
> > additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
>
>
>
> --
> lucidworks.com
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional
> commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------

On Sep 24, 2012, at 6:11 PM, Uwe Schindler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> In other Open Source projects, the stable release branch is closed down and only the RM has commit rights (e.g., PHP before it used to use GIT).

Personally, I think our system is better - use consensus wherever you can avoid hard rules wherever you can.

Consensus and Lazy Consensus, 3 +1's for a release. Who needs any more :)

- Mark

On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 6:17 PM, Mark Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Personally, I think our system is better - use consensus wherever you can
> avoid hard rules wherever you can.
>
> Consensus and Lazy Consensus, 3 +1's for a release. Who needs any more :)
>

yeah, i dont want to be the one guy committing to this thing, I don't
currently have the time to manage all the fixes, nor do i necessarily
know enough about all the pieces involved to do the correct
cost-benefit analysis.

instead i'm asking that other people do this: maybe the 'correct' fix
for some bugs is too risky to go in the release branch and a safe
workaround makes more sense (we have 4.x/5.x for bigger changes, thats
fine).

and please be conservative, just open the issue with Fix version: 4.0
and Blocker, and take your time. let changes bake. add tests to ensure
additional regressions are not introduced by fixes (I am concerned
about that). run 'ant nightly-smoke' before committing to the release
branch (because my jenkins is running this continously, and is
configured to automatically revert commits that break the build).

of course I want a solid release that isn't full of bugs, I am just of
course pushing back on *all changes* because I'm trying to encourage
stability.

--
lucidworks.com

---------------------------------------------------------------------

: I'm not really sure thats a reflection on this release candidate: I'm
: not sure the smoke tester works on windows. I think you may have to
: test manually.

FWIW: smokeTestRelease.py says...

# This tool expects to find /lucene and /solr off the base URL.  You
# must have a working gpg, tar, unzip in your path.  This has been
# tested on Linux and on Cygwin under Windows 7.

I think what sarowe is seeing is a symptom of a bug in how commits are
dealt with during the "recovery" phase on server startup, but i'm not
certain (nor am i certain how significant of a bug this would be i na
typical situation)...

https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-3884#comment-13462233

Steve: if you could attach *both* of hte solr-example logs from a failed
run (the one from java6 that passes, and then the one from java7 that
fails) that would probably be helpful.

-Hoss

---------------------------------------------------------------------

On a separate box with Win7+Cygwin, I just now successfully ran the smoke tester (it even says so now: "SUCCESS!").  So I think it's not a problem with running the smoke tester on Windows.

Also, on

-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Muir [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, September 24, 2012 2:32 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: VOTE: release 4.0

On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 2:26 PM, Steven A Rowe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Running smokeTestRelease.py on Win7+Cygwin, I can't get past the Solr example test under Java7.
>

I'm not really sure thats a reflection on this release candidate: I'm
not sure the smoke tester works on windows. I think you may have to
test manually.

--
lucidworks.com

---------------------------------------------------------------------

: Artifacts are here: http://s.apache.org/lusolr40rc0

For the record: My vote for RC0 is -1.  

In my opinion, SOLR-3875, SOLR-3879, and LUCENE-4430 seem serious enough
to warrant a respin (and if a few of the other recently fixed bugs can
make it in even better).

I don't want to speak on behalf of anyone but myself, but the sense i get
from various comments in Jira & IRC is that I am not alone in thinking we
should respin a new RC1 -- however this should in no way discourage people
from continuing to test RC0, because that's the only way we are going to
find more bugs that we should fix for RC1 (even though i've already voted
-1, I'm sure as hell going to keep hammering away on RC0)

-Hoss

---------------------------------------------------------------------