Le 22/02/2011 23:47, sebb a écrit : > On 22 February 2011 21:05, Luc Maisonobe <luc.maison...@free.fr> wrote: >> Le 22/02/2011 01:37, sebb a écrit : >>> On 21 February 2011 22:10, Luc Maisonobe <luc.maison...@free.fr> wrote: >>>> Le 21/02/2011 21:09, sebb a écrit : >>>>> On 21 February 2011 19:32, Luc Maisonobe <luc.maison...@free.fr> wrote: >>>>>> This vote is cancelled. >>>>>> >>>>>> There are some incompatible changes in RC2 in the user level interface >>>>>> StepHandler, which were not detected by CLIRR. >>>>>> >>>>>> I will prepare a new release quickly. >>>>> >>>>> I suggest you wait a day or so - there are some other unexplained >>>>> errors that need investigation. >>>> >>>> You are right. >>>> I have reverted the exception changes further, so there should be less >>>> compatibility problems with the 2.1 tests. Could you check if things >>>> have improved with the current branch 2.X ? >>> >>> Tests now compile OK, apart from the one that uses EventState. >> >> This is normal. >> >>> >>> But there are quite a few errors/failures. >> >> I think most of them are due to either fixed bugs (this is the case for >> ode) or tests on exception localization which has changed. >> Could someone check the failing 2.1 tests for >> GLSMultipleLinearRegressionTest and OLSMultipleLinearRegressionTest ? >> They fail when running against 2.2 with an error: not enough data (6 >> rows) for this many predictors (6 predictors). >> >> If people consider the failures in these 2.1 tests are normal, I will do >> another release candidate tomorrow, with a target publication date set >> to Sunday. >> >>> >>> There are still some issues with exception checking. >>> >>> For example, NevilleInterpolatorTest.testParameters() expects to catch >>> MathException but gets MathUserException. >>> I think this is a remnant of the changes relating to >>> FunctionEvaluationException. >> >> Yes, I hope to have fixed that by now. > > There are far fewer errors. > > However, BrentMinimizerTest.testSinMin() fails with NoDataException, > whereas it is expecting IllegalStateException - which is also what the > UnivariateRealOptimizer interface says.
OK, I have fixed this one. > > NevilleInterpolatorTest.testParameters() expects MathException, but > gets MathUserException I cannot reproduce it and in fact MathUserException has been completely removed from 2.2. > > BigFractionTest expects NullPointerException but gets NullArgumentException OK, fixed these ones too. I'll make an RC3 this morning. Luc > >>> >>> I think because MathUserException is unchecked the compiler does not >>> complain that >>> PolynomialFunctionLagrangeForm.value(double z) throws MathUserException >>> even though it implements >>> double value(double x) throws FunctionEvaluationException >>> >>> Perhaps this is OK - the code still throws an exception - but it would >>> be helpful to mention this in the release notes. >> >> I have played it safe be completely reverting to former behavior and >> removed MathUserException. >> >>> >>> BTW, one way to test against the 2.1 test cases is to checkout >>> branches/2_X, and replace the test tree with a checkout of the 2.1 >>> test sources. >> >> Thanks, this was the way for me to run the tests. I am still unable to >> run them with test-jar.xml. >> >> Luc >> >>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Luc >>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Luc >>>>>> >>>>>> Le 20/02/2011 16:15, Luc Maisonobe a écrit : >>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Release notes: >>>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~luc/math-2.2-RC2/RELEASE-NOTES.txt >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 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... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 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 >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> 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 >> >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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
