On 2/21/11 7:46 AM, sebb wrote: > On 20 February 2011 15:15, Luc Maisonobe <luc.maison...@free.fr> wrote: >> Tag: http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/proper/math/tags/MATH_2_2_RC2/ >> >> Distributions: http://people.apache.org/~luc/math-2.2-RC2/ >> >> Maven artifacts: http://people.apache.org/~luc/math-2.2-RC2/maven/ >> >> Documentation bundled with the binary distribution: >> http://people.apache.org/~luc/math-2.2-RC2/docs/ >> >> Output of maven:site run against the source distribution: >> http://people.apache.org/~luc/math-2.2-RC2/site/ >> >> Clirr report: >> http://people.apache.org/~luc/math-2.2-RC2/site/clirr-report.html > The change to the EventState.reinitializeBegin method means that > existing JUnit tests from 2.1 don't compile. > > I don't know if that is considered an external API or not. > > Seems to me all the Clirr errors ought to be mentioned in the RN > >> Release notes: http://people.apache.org/~luc/math-2.2-RC2/RELEASE-NOTES.txt > These don't state what the incompatible API changes are. > >> Votes, please. This vote will close in 72 hours, 2011-02-23T16:00:00 UTC >> >> [ ] +1 Release these artifacts >> [ ] +0 OK, but... >> [ ] -0 OK, but really should fix... >> [ ] -1 I oppose this release because... > I have tried running the 2.1 tests against the 2.2 code, and there > still seem to be a lot of errors. Some of these may be test bugs, but > I doubt that they all are. > > I need to investigate further, and generate some scripts so that > others can run the same tests. > > At present I am -1, because there appear to be non-trivial API > breakages, and 2.1 test cases have errors and failures. > I am still testing the release. I was not clear in my comments on RC1. I meant to leave the specific breakage comments in, but modify the disclaimer, so it would read something like
This release contains some minor compatibility breaks with version 2.1 in some internal classes but none of them are in APIs likely to be accessed by user code: the MessagesResources_fr class has been removed (replaced by a properties file); the arguments of the EventState.reinitializeBegin method have changed; some private fields in AbstractStepInterpolator have been replaced. We are in a tough spot with these changes, as they were necessary to fix some bugs. I am in favor of allowing these breaks. If there are 2.1 unit test failures independent of these changes or other bug fixes, we should understand them. If we do another RC, we can add back the specifics above. That is not by itself enough for me to vote negatively, though. Phil >> Tha >> >> Luc >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >> >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
