Looks like I was one minute too late. 🥹 Uwe
Am 14. Oktober 2024 15:05:03 MESZ schrieb Uwe Schindler <u...@thetaphi.de>: >Done. > >Uwe > >Am 14.10.2024 um 11:13 schrieb Luca Cavanna: >> >> @Uwe Schindler <mailto:u...@thetaphi.de> we have adapted Elasticsearch to >> the expressions engine changes, no issues so far, that looked like a very >> nice simplification. Agreed that painless should also be updated to work >> similarly. >> >> Would you like to add the expressions changes to the release notes perhaps? >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/LUCENE/Release+Notes+10.0.0 / >> >> >> On Mon, Oct 14, 2024 at 10:51 AM Adrien Grand <jpou...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> +1 SUCCESS! [0:48:05.011843] >> >> I also ran the "Search Benchmark, the Game" benchmark between >> Lucene 9.12 and Lucene 10 >> (https://tantivy-search.github.io/bench/), differences were just >> noise. >> >> On Sun, Oct 13, 2024 at 8:00 PM Uwe Schindler <u...@thetaphi.de> wrote: >> >> P.S.: I also noticed the copyright typo in the NOTICE.txt >> file. If we respin, let's fix it. >> >> Uwe >> >> Am 13.10.2024 um 19:49 schrieb Uwe Schindler: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I had not much time to look closely into the artifacts, but I >>> let Policeman Jenkins run the smoke tester with Java 21, 22, 23: >>> >>> https://jenkins.thetaphi.de/job/Lucene-10.x-Release-Tester/1/console >>> >>> The system reported success, so in case of any doubt: The >>> release looks ready for all three Java versions. >>> >>> I also opened existing indexes with Luke and it was >>> successful. I was just wondering; this index with Codec >>> Version Lucene80 opened successfully (I created it 3 years >>> ago on my old laptop and it was lingering in some directory): >>> >>> I think this worked because the index was created with 9.0, >>> but I wonder about codec format Lucene80. >>> >>> *One thing I am specially interested: *Did somebody already >>> ported the expressions module changes in Elasticsearch? The >>> new module no longer supports custom classloaders, but it is >>> a much safer alternative than the old code as it requires >>> "pre-linked" method handles (in fact it is 100% safe and >>> cannot leak any custom function to unsafe script writers, >>> because it is impossible to call any code from JDK without a >>> pre-resolved MethodHandle in place). There is a deperecated >>> API to convert custom function maps, but I'd liker to know if >>> there were any problem (I checked Javadocs that nobody >>> removed this API during deprecated API cleanup, because it >>> was added to support backwards compatibility). My personal >>> favourite in this release is next to the changes in >>> MMapDirectory abot preloading (thanks Adrien!) is the updated >>> expressions module because it uses the latest and greatest >>> way to compile code using dynamic constants to effectively >>> call static methods from the APIs - Lucene is the first >>> dynamic language external to JDK using this. I am just >>> interested if some Elasticsearch security people complained >>> about the missing classloader support (which is inappropriate >>> now as the MethodHandles provided by dnamic constants in the >>> java files with a dynamic lookup at runtime offer much more >>> safety to invalid invocations; I'd suggest to rewrite >>> painless to use it, too). If they do, bring them in contact >>> with me! >>> >>> Here is my +1 to release! >>> >>> Uwe >>> >>> Am 10.10.2024 um 09:24 schrieb Luca Cavanna: >>>> Please vote for release candidate 4 for Lucene 10.0.0 >>>> >>>> I published a draft of the release notes at >>>> >>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/LUCENE/Release+Notes+10.0.0 . >>>> Feedback is welcome. Feel free to edit directly. >>>> >>>> The artifacts can be downloaded from: >>>> >>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/lucene/lucene-10.0.0-RC4-rev-eadc07cc6a17f9cfea81f3e82ec06164014232fb >>>> >>>> You can run the smoke tester directly with this command: >>>> >>>> python3 -u dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py \ >>>> >>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/lucene/lucene-10.0.0-RC4-rev-eadc07cc6a17f9cfea81f3e82ec06164014232fb >>>> >>>> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours i.e. until >>>> 2024-10-13 08:00 UTC. >>>> >>>> [ ] +1  approve >>>> [ ] +0  no opinion >>>> [ ] -1  disapprove (and reason why) >>>> >>>> Here is my +1 >>>> >>>> SUCCESS! [0:59:11.080740] >>>> >>> -- Uwe Schindler >>> Achterdiek 19, D-28357 Bremen >>> https://www.thetaphi.de >>> eMail:u...@thetaphi.de >> >> -- Uwe Schindler >> Achterdiek 19, D-28357 Bremen >> https://www.thetaphi.de >> eMail:u...@thetaphi.de >> >> >> >> -- Adrien >> >-- >Uwe Schindler >Achterdiek 19, D-28357 Bremen >https://www.thetaphi.de >eMail:u...@thetaphi.de -- Uwe Schindler Achterdiek 19, 28357 Bremen https://www.thetaphi.de
