Re: [VOTE] Release Jakarta Cactus 1.8.1
"Petar Tahchiev" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.jakarta.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Actually Hentry's problem was that he had something alreadty running on port 8080. But you are right. We check if the property is set :-( Ok, I will try to investigate further. On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 12:06 AM, sebb <[email protected]> wrote: > On 20/01/2009, Petar Tahchiev <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi guys, > > > > I think I found the problem, but since I cannot reproduce > > this behaviour I am clueless if this will work. > > I think the problem is here: > > > > http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/SUREFIRE-98 > > The issue relates to not finding a property - however the code already > does a separate check to see if the property has been retrieved OK, so > I don't think it applies here. > > > I changed the version of the Surefire plugin we use to the latest > > one. > > > > I have commited it. Anything else before I make the RC-3 and cast the > vote? > > > > Probably best if Henri could provide more info on the failure he saw, > which I think was different from mine. > > I'm also intending to try a test on Unix. > > I suggest waiting a bit. > > > > > Thanks again, Petar. > > > > On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 10:51 PM, Petar Tahchiev < > > > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Hi Sebb, > > > > > > I removed the CDDL license and described the servlet-api as > > > an Apache 2.0 licensed. I also added the Apache license headers. > > > I also changed the version of AspectJ we are using. > > > > > > About the test failures that you mention I think they are different > > > from what Henry is getting. Anyways I am unable to reproduce them :-( > > > > > > What should I do? Do I need to make a RC-3 and call the vote on it? > > > > > > Thanks for the tips guys. > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 9:42 PM, sebb <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > >> On 20/01/2009, sebb <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> > On 20/01/2009, Petar Tahchiev <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> > > Hi all, > > >> > > > > >> > > maybe I am too impatient, but has anybody tried the artifacts? > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > 1 minor problem - the .asc files should be detached ascii > signatures, > > >> > not signed archives. > > >> > No need to recreate the RC, just recreate the .asc files. > > >> > > > >> > We don't normally provide binary .sig files - they can be deleted. > > >> > > > >> > I'm still looking at other aspects of the RC. > > >> > > > >> > > >> The servlet-api-2.4.jar file is an Apache version, as Henri already > > >> mentioned. > > >> The cddl licence should be deleted, and the README updated. > > >> > > >> Like Henri, I also get test failures: > > >> > > >> [surefire] Tests run: 5, Failures: 3, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 0.25 > > >> sec <<<<<<<< FAILURE !! > > >> [surefire] Running > > >> org.apache.cactus.integration.ant.deployment.webapp.TestWarArchive > > >> [surefire] Tests run: 3, Failures: 3, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 0.031 > > >> sec <<<<<<<< FAILURE !! > > >> [surefire] Running > > >> org.apache.cactus.integration.ant.deployment.webapp.TestWebXml > > >> [surefire] Tests run: 54, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 2.359 > sec > > >> [surefire] Running > > >> org.apache.cactus.integration.ant.deployment.webapp.TestWebXmlVersion > > >> [surefire] Tests run: 8, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 0.093 > sec > > >> [surefire] Running > org.apache.cactus.integration.ant.TestCactifyEarTask > > >> [surefire] Tests run: 3, Failures: 3, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 0.031 > > >> sec <<<<<<<< FAILURE !! > > >> [surefire] Running > org.apache.cactus.integration.ant.TestCactifyWarTask > > >> [surefire] Tests run: 21, Failures: 21, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: > 0.281 > > >> sec <<<<<<<< FAILURE !! > > >> [surefire] Running org.apache.cactus.integration.ant.TestCactusTask > > >> [surefire] Tests run: 7, Failures: 7, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 0.078 > > >> sec <<<<<<<< FAILURE !! > > >> [surefire] Running > org.apache.cactus.integration.ant.TestCactusTestTask > > >> [surefire] Tests run: 7, Failures: 7, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 0.094 > > >> sec <<<<<<<< FAILURE !! > > >> [surefire] Running > > >> org.apache.cactus.integration.ant.TestRunServerTestsTask > > >> [surefire] Tests run: 6, Failures: 6, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 0.078 > > >> sec <<<<<<<< FAILURE !! > > >> > > >> I ran "mvn test", which failed when it could not find the cactus > jars. > > >> It would be better if this worked without needing to do "mvn install" > > >> first. > > >> > > >> I then ran "mvn install" and got the errors shown above. > > >> > > >> It looks like these are all caused by > > >> > > >> junit.framework.AssertionFailedError: The system property > > >> 'testinput.dir' must point to an existing directory > > >> at junit.framework.Assert.fail(Assert.java:47) > > >> at junit.framework.Assert.assertTrue(Assert.java:20) > > >> at > > >> > org.apache.cactus.integration.ant.AntTestCase.getBuildFile(AntTestCase.java:370) > > >> > > >> This is a bit odd, as the directory appears to be there. > > >> > > >> The assert() message ought to quote the directory name it is looking > for. > > >> [I'll update SVN trunk.] > > >> > > >> Even odder, the problem does not occur when I reran the test. > > >> I've tried several times to recreate the error, but it only happened > once. > > >> > > >> == > > >> > > >> There are various jetty files under > > >> > > >> samples/jetty/src > > >> > > >> which don't have AL headers. Are these Jetty sources? > > >> If so, then the source archive really needs to include the relevant > > >> license. > > >> If the samples were generated under the ASF, then they need the AL > > >> headers. > > >> > > >> There seem to be some oddities in the main pom.xml: > > >> > > >> <dependencies> > > >> <dependency> > > >> <groupId>aspectj</groupId> > > >> <artifactId>aspectjrt</artifactId> > > >> <version>1.5.3</version> > > >> </dependency> > > >> > > >> specifies version 1.5.3, whereas > > >> > > >> <dependencyManagement> > > >> <dependencies> > > >> ... > > >> <dependency> > > >> <groupId>aspectj</groupId> > > >> <artifactId>aspectjrt</artifactId> > > >> <version>1.2.1</version> > > >> </dependency> > > >> > > >> specifies version 1.2.1 - I would have expected the two to be the > same? > > >> > > >> == > > >> > > >> There are several maven.xml and project.xml files in the directory > > >> tree - are these still current? > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > What is your opinion expressed by any of the three numbers :-). > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 10:33 PM, Petar Tahchiev < > > >> > > [email protected]> wrote: > > >> > > > > >> > > > Hi guys, > > >> > > > > > >> > > > here comes the second attempt for > > >> > > > releasing cactus-1.8.1. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > The artifacts, hashes and signatures are here: > > >> > > > > >> > > > http://people.apache.org/~ptahchiev/1.8.1-rc2/<http://people.apache.org/%7Eptahchiev/1.8.1-rc2/> > <http://people.apache.org/%7Eptahchiev/1.8.1-rc2/> > > >> <http://people.apache.org/%7Eptahchiev/1.8.1-rc2/> > > >> > > > > > >> > > > The tagged code-base is here: > > >> > > > > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/jakarta/cactus/tags/1.8.1-rc2/ > > >> > > > > > >> > > > I think it is OK this time. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > Here is my +1 > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > Please vote. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > Thanks. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > -- > > >> > > > Regards, Petar! > > >> > > > Karlovo, Bulgaria. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > EOOXML objections > > >> > > > http://www.grokdoc.net/index.php/EOOXML_objections > > >> > > > > > >> > > > Public PGP Key at: > > >> > > > > > >> > http://keyserver.linux.it/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x1A15B53B761500F9 > > >> > > > Key Fingerprint: AA16 8004 AADD 9C76 EF5B 4210 1A15 B53B > 7615 > > >> 00F9 > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > -- > > >> > > Regards, Petar! > > >> > > Karlovo, Bulgaria. > > >> > > > > >> > > EOOXML objections > > >> > > http://www.grokdoc.net/index.php/EOOXML_objections > > >> > > > > >> > > Public PGP Key at: > > >> > > > > >> > http://keyserver.linux.it/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x1A15B53B761500F9 > > >> > > Key Fingerprint: AA16 8004 AADD 9C76 EF5B 4210 1A15 B53B 7615 > 00F9 > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > > >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Regards, Petar! > > > Karlovo, Bulgaria. > > > > > > EOOXML objections > > > http://www.grokdoc.net/index.php/EOOXML_objections > > > > > > Public PGP Key at: > > > http://keyserver.linux.it/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x1A15B53B761500F9 > > > Key Fingerprint: AA16 8004 AADD 9C76 EF5B 4210 1A15 B53B 7615 00F9 > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Regards, Petar! > > Karlovo, Bulgaria. > > > > EOOXML objections > > http://www.grokdoc.net/index.php/EOOXML_objections > > > > Public PGP Key at: > > http://keyserver.linux.it/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x1A15B53B761500F9 > > Key Fingerprint: AA16 8004 AADD 9C76 EF5B 4210 1A15 B53B 7615 00F9 > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > -- Regards, Petar! Karlovo, Bulgaria. EOOXML objections http://www.grokdoc.net/index.php/EOOXML_objections Public PGP Key at: http://keyserver.linux.it/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x1A15B53B761500F9 Key Fingerprint: AA16 8004 AADD 9C76 EF5B 4210 1A15 B53B 7615 00F9