Re: [VOTE] Release 1.5 of NetBeans HTML/Java API
On 21 October 2017 at 18:27, Mark Struberg wrote: >> Even though there is no >> veto vote on releases, if someone raised a valid issue, the group might >> postpone a release as well, even after +1s. > > > Yes indeed. Sometimes a single person discovers a problem during the voting > process and casts -1. > A -1 always should come with good arguments. > Usually that leads to the others (who already voted) review this argument. > And if it turns out to really be a problem which the others have simply > overlooked, then they often amend their vote to a -1 as well. Or the RM can just cancel the vote if it's obvious that the problem is sufficiently serious. I don't think there is any need for additional -1 votes in that case. > LieGrue, > strub > > >> Am 21.10.2017 um 19:15 schrieb Wade Chandler : >> >> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html >> >> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes >> >> It is technically both with nuances. Time and 3 binding +1s plus a majority >> +1s. The 72 hours is a participation enabler. The 3 bindings is the minimum >> required, but a majority -1s would be a big deal. Even though there is no >> veto vote on releases, if someone raised a valid issue, the group might >> postpone a release as well, even after +1s. >> >> Wade >> >> >> >> On Oct 21, 2017 08:55, "Geertjan Wielenga" >> wrote: >> >>> Many thanks -- so, right now, Bertrand, John, and Mark have done binding >>> votes -- i.e., two of our mentors and the VP Incubator. >>> >>> How many binding votes are needed or is it simply a question of time, i.e., >>> at the time that the vote expires, if there's no -1, and only +1 binding >>> votes, then the release of this specific repo that is one of the repose of >>> Apache NetBeans is approved? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Gj >>> >>> On Sat, Oct 21, 2017 at 2:06 PM, Mark Struberg >>> wrote: >>> +1 IPMC binding LICENSE, NOTICE, rat, dependencies, signing, etc all looks good. However when building it from the distribution zip on my macbook with java8 144 I sometimes get test errors. All of them in knockout.js, but each time something different: Configuring TestNG with: TestNG652Configurator Oct 21, 2017 1:55:53 PM org.glassfish.grizzly.http. >>> server.NetworkListener start INFORMATION: Started listener bound to [0.0.0.0:18572] Oct 21, 2017 1:55:53 PM org.glassfish.grizzly.http.server.HttpServer >>> start INFORMATION: [HttpServer] Started. Tests run: 78, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 6.451 >>> sec <<< FAILURE! displayContentOfComputedArrayOnComputedASubpair(org. >>> netbeans.html.ko4j.KOFx) Time elapsed: 0.03 sec <<< FAILURE! java.lang.AssertionError: We got callback from 2nd child null expecting: null actual: Last at net.java.html.json.tests.Utils.assertEquals(Utils.java:217) at net.java.html.json.tests.KnockoutTest. displayContentOfComputedArrayOnComputedASubpair(KnockoutTest.java:622) at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method) at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke( NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:62) at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke( DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43) at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:498) at org.netbeans.html.ko4j.KOFx.run(KOFx.java:73) Tests run: 78, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 7.772 >>> sec <<< FAILURE! rawObject(org.netbeans.html.ko4j.KOFx) Time elapsed: 0.067 sec <<< FAILURE! netscape.javascript.JSException: netscape.javascript.JSException: java.lang.NullPointerException at org.netbeans.html.ko4j.$JsCallbacks$.raw$org_netbeans_ html_ko4j_Knockout$setValue$ILjava_lang_Object_2($JsCallbacks$.java:156) at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method) at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke( NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:62) at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke( DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43) at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:498) at sun.reflect.misc.Trampoline.invoke(MethodUtil.java:71) at sun.reflect.GeneratedMethodAccessor1.invoke(Unknown Source) at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke( DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43) at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:498) at sun.reflect.misc.MethodUtil.invoke(MethodUtil.java:275) at com.sun.webkit.Utilities.lambda$fwkInvokeWithContext$ 60(Utilities.java:94) at java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method) at com.sun.webkit.Utilities.fwkInvokeWithContext( Utilities.java:94) at com.sun.webkit.dom.JSObject.callImpl(Native Method) at com.sun.webkit.dom.JSObject.
Re: [VOTE] Release 1.5 of NetBeans HTML/Java API
Hmm, well, but that usually only happens if it is clear that the vote should get cancelled. LieGrue, strub > Am 22.10.2017 um 15:29 schrieb sebb : > > On 21 October 2017 at 18:27, Mark Struberg wrote: >>> Even though there is no >>> veto vote on releases, if someone raised a valid issue, the group might >>> postpone a release as well, even after +1s. >> >> >> Yes indeed. Sometimes a single person discovers a problem during the voting >> process and casts -1. >> A -1 always should come with good arguments. >> Usually that leads to the others (who already voted) review this argument. >> And if it turns out to really be a problem which the others have simply >> overlooked, then they often amend their vote to a -1 as well. > > Or the RM can just cancel the vote if it's obvious that the problem is > sufficiently serious. > I don't think there is any need for additional -1 votes in that case. > >> LieGrue, >> strub >> >> >>> Am 21.10.2017 um 19:15 schrieb Wade Chandler : >>> >>> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html >>> >>> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes >>> >>> It is technically both with nuances. Time and 3 binding +1s plus a majority >>> +1s. The 72 hours is a participation enabler. The 3 bindings is the minimum >>> required, but a majority -1s would be a big deal. Even though there is no >>> veto vote on releases, if someone raised a valid issue, the group might >>> postpone a release as well, even after +1s. >>> >>> Wade >>> >>> >>> >>> On Oct 21, 2017 08:55, "Geertjan Wielenga" >>> >>> wrote: >>> Many thanks -- so, right now, Bertrand, John, and Mark have done binding votes -- i.e., two of our mentors and the VP Incubator. How many binding votes are needed or is it simply a question of time, i.e., at the time that the vote expires, if there's no -1, and only +1 binding votes, then the release of this specific repo that is one of the repose of Apache NetBeans is approved? Thanks, Gj On Sat, Oct 21, 2017 at 2:06 PM, Mark Struberg wrote: > +1 IPMC binding > > LICENSE, NOTICE, rat, dependencies, signing, etc all looks good. > > However when building it from the distribution zip on my macbook with > java8 144 I sometimes get test errors. > All of them in knockout.js, but each time something different: > > > Configuring TestNG with: TestNG652Configurator > Oct 21, 2017 1:55:53 PM org.glassfish.grizzly.http. server.NetworkListener > start > INFORMATION: Started listener bound to [0.0.0.0:18572] > Oct 21, 2017 1:55:53 PM org.glassfish.grizzly.http.server.HttpServer start > INFORMATION: [HttpServer] Started. > Tests run: 78, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 6.451 sec > <<< FAILURE! > displayContentOfComputedArrayOnComputedASubpair(org. netbeans.html.ko4j.KOFx) > Time elapsed: 0.03 sec <<< FAILURE! > java.lang.AssertionError: We got callback from 2nd child null expecting: > null actual: Last > at net.java.html.json.tests.Utils.assertEquals(Utils.java:217) > at net.java.html.json.tests.KnockoutTest. > displayContentOfComputedArrayOnComputedASubpair(KnockoutTest.java:622) > at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method) > at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke( > NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:62) > at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke( > DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43) > at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:498) > at org.netbeans.html.ko4j.KOFx.run(KOFx.java:73) > > > Tests run: 78, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 7.772 sec > <<< FAILURE! > rawObject(org.netbeans.html.ko4j.KOFx) Time elapsed: 0.067 sec <<< > FAILURE! > netscape.javascript.JSException: netscape.javascript.JSException: > java.lang.NullPointerException > at org.netbeans.html.ko4j.$JsCallbacks$.raw$org_netbeans_ > html_ko4j_Knockout$setValue$ILjava_lang_Object_2($JsCallbacks$.java:156) > at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method) > at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke( > NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:62) > at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke( > DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43) > at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:498) > at sun.reflect.misc.Trampoline.invoke(MethodUtil.java:71) > at sun.reflect.GeneratedMethodAccessor1.invoke(Unknown Source) > at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke( > DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43) > at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:498) > at sun.reflect.misc.MethodUtil.invoke(MethodUtil.java:275) > at com.sun.webkit.Utilities.lambda$fwkInvokeWithContext$ > 60(Utili
Re: [VOTE] Release 1.5 of NetBeans HTML/Java API
On 22 October 2017 at 17:53, Mark Struberg wrote: > Hmm, well, but that usually only happens if it is clear that the vote should > get cancelled. Isn't that what I wrote? > LieGrue, > strub > >> Am 22.10.2017 um 15:29 schrieb sebb : >> >> On 21 October 2017 at 18:27, Mark Struberg wrote: Even though there is no veto vote on releases, if someone raised a valid issue, the group might postpone a release as well, even after +1s. >>> >>> >>> Yes indeed. Sometimes a single person discovers a problem during the voting >>> process and casts -1. >>> A -1 always should come with good arguments. >>> Usually that leads to the others (who already voted) review this argument. >>> And if it turns out to really be a problem which the others have simply >>> overlooked, then they often amend their vote to a -1 as well. >> >> Or the RM can just cancel the vote if it's obvious that the problem is >> sufficiently serious. >> I don't think there is any need for additional -1 votes in that case. >> >>> LieGrue, >>> strub >>> >>> Am 21.10.2017 um 19:15 schrieb Wade Chandler : https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes It is technically both with nuances. Time and 3 binding +1s plus a majority +1s. The 72 hours is a participation enabler. The 3 bindings is the minimum required, but a majority -1s would be a big deal. Even though there is no veto vote on releases, if someone raised a valid issue, the group might postpone a release as well, even after +1s. Wade On Oct 21, 2017 08:55, "Geertjan Wielenga" wrote: > Many thanks -- so, right now, Bertrand, John, and Mark have done binding > votes -- i.e., two of our mentors and the VP Incubator. > > How many binding votes are needed or is it simply a question of time, > i.e., > at the time that the vote expires, if there's no -1, and only +1 binding > votes, then the release of this specific repo that is one of the repose of > Apache NetBeans is approved? > > Thanks, > > Gj > > On Sat, Oct 21, 2017 at 2:06 PM, Mark Struberg > wrote: > >> +1 IPMC binding >> >> LICENSE, NOTICE, rat, dependencies, signing, etc all looks good. >> >> However when building it from the distribution zip on my macbook with >> java8 144 I sometimes get test errors. >> All of them in knockout.js, but each time something different: >> >> >> Configuring TestNG with: TestNG652Configurator >> Oct 21, 2017 1:55:53 PM org.glassfish.grizzly.http. > server.NetworkListener >> start >> INFORMATION: Started listener bound to [0.0.0.0:18572] >> Oct 21, 2017 1:55:53 PM org.glassfish.grizzly.http.server.HttpServer > start >> INFORMATION: [HttpServer] Started. >> Tests run: 78, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 6.451 > sec >> <<< FAILURE! >> displayContentOfComputedArrayOnComputedASubpair(org. > netbeans.html.ko4j.KOFx) >> Time elapsed: 0.03 sec <<< FAILURE! >> java.lang.AssertionError: We got callback from 2nd child null expecting: >> null actual: Last >> at net.java.html.json.tests.Utils.assertEquals(Utils.java:217) >> at net.java.html.json.tests.KnockoutTest. >> displayContentOfComputedArrayOnComputedASubpair(KnockoutTest.java:622) >> at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method) >> at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke( >> NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:62) >> at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke( >> DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43) >> at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:498) >> at org.netbeans.html.ko4j.KOFx.run(KOFx.java:73) >> >> >> Tests run: 78, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 7.772 > sec >> <<< FAILURE! >> rawObject(org.netbeans.html.ko4j.KOFx) Time elapsed: 0.067 sec <<< >> FAILURE! >> netscape.javascript.JSException: netscape.javascript.JSException: >> java.lang.NullPointerException >> at org.netbeans.html.ko4j.$JsCallbacks$.raw$org_netbeans_ >> html_ko4j_Knockout$setValue$ILjava_lang_Object_2($JsCallbacks$.java:156) >> at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method) >> at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke( >> NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:62) >> at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke( >> DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43) >> at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:498) >> at sun.reflect.misc.Trampoline.invoke(MethodUtil.java:71) >> at sun.reflect.GeneratedMethodAccessor1.invoke(Unknown Source) >> at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke( >> DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43) >> at java.lang.reflect.Met
Re: [VOTE] Release 1.5 of NetBeans HTML/Java API
+1 (binding) One improvement to consider for the next release is appending the license for Knockout (MIT) to the embedded LICENSE in the build ko4j jar artifact, as is required for distributing this artifact. And another is maybe generating a more explicit artifact name for ko4j. Thanks, Ate On 2017-10-19 14:17, Jaroslav Tulach wrote: Hi. The NetBeans incubating community has just approved the release of HTML/Java API version 1.5. See the discussion at https://s.apache.org/00WM which contains the technical information as well as all the +1 votes including one by Bertrand, the NetBeans incubating community mentor. As a result of such unison approval, I'd like to ask you to hold the Incubator PMC vote to release: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/netbeans/ as NetBeans HTML/Java Incubating API version 1.5. Can you cast your votes in next 72h, please? I am copying here the evaluation as done by Bertrand: I have reviewed $SHA1(incubating-netbeans-html4j-1.5.zip)= fd77975f1adbcbc4b926e1cfab6865f47db6df3c +1 for releasing that (after the Incubator PMC vote) signatures and digests match. LICENSE, NOTICE, DEPENDENCIES look good to me. The dependency on json.org will need to be removed ( https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html ) - is there a jira ticket for this? I think it's ok to release as is, provided there's a plan to remove it. FYI: the bug is reported as https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NETBEANS-89 and its fix is ready to be integrated in the next version of HTML/Java API. The archive doesn't contain binary files except for a few PNG images. The RAT report passes, with the following exclusions: Exclude: **/*.sigtest Exclude: **/.git/** Exclude: **/.maven/** Exclude: **/.repository/** Exclude: **/target/** Exclude: .gitignore Exclude: DEPENDENCIES Exclude: README.md FWIW, in case someone wants to review the changes to the license headers they have apparently be made in these two commits: https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans-html4j/commit/a262480a0126b6797 5389685925bf5c3e13b4061 https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans-html4j/commit/b4fdfc8314c80730 59e91de4eea586d194a6b76f -Bertrand Thanks in advance for your votes. -jt - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
