[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
RE: [wtp-releng] What's happened to our M3 candidate!!
|
I am not aware of any actions that would be necessary by
adopters. The usage scans did not report any violations. Of course, if
problems are discovered by adopters we can fix them in M4 (one of the
reasons that it is key to get large changes like this out as early as
possible).
Regarding the build and junit failures, I released a fix to
take care of the build failure and a fix to take care of majority junit
failures. There are still some junit failures remaining, although I suspect
at least some of these might be related to differences in running tests
from Eclipse vs in the build. Will know for sure in the next build. It is also
not clear to me whether all of the remaining failures are related to
my changes. I will keep looking at them, but if someone from the j2ee
team is online and wants to help out, that would be
great.
Thanks,
- Konstantin
Thanks Kosta. As usual, your
explanations make sense and I'll rest easier now. I am still wondering .... do any adopters have to be
aware or adopt to any changes? Or should it all be transparent by the time your
done in the next few days? And ....
to confess my own error, and communicate it here so everyone knows what's going
on .... I changed to the "S-bulid"
target for our milestone, but forgot to update a label, so the first one of
those builds says "M1" ... no, I really did not revert to M1 code :) ... it's
just a label ... and the very next build
will correctly be labeled "M3" and I'll delete the old mislabeled one.
Thanks again.
"Konstantin Komissarchik"
<kosta@xxxxxxx> Sent by:
wtp-releng-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
11/10/2007 02:10 PM
Please respond
to Webtools releng discussion list
<wtp-releng@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
|
To
| "Webtools releng discussion list"
<wtp-releng@xxxxxxxxxxx>
|
cc
|
|
Subject
| RE: [wtp-releng] What's happened to
our M3 candidate!! |
|
See comments inline. In short, there is not reason to
panic.
From: wtp-releng-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:wtp-releng-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of David M
Williams
Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2007 9:58 AM
To:
wtp-releng@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [wtp-releng] What's happened to our M3
candidate!!
First, the builds broke completely, since someone removed all source
from
org.eclipse.jst.jee/appclientcreation
but did not remove appclientcreation
from the
build.properties.
(a
missing "source" entry is considered a fatel error).
So, I fixed and
released that change to build.properties ... assuming it really was supposed to
have been removed???
But, maybe it was not supposed to have been removed, and that's the
cause of one or both of the next two problems???
[kosta] Thanks for fixing up the build.properties files. The
change was intentional (part of merging of j2ee/jee - related facets code, the
separation of which was causing a lot of issues).
Second, there is a
compile error in
org.eclipse.jst.jsf.ui
>From the history, there's been no
change in jst.ui that would account for it.
That is a HUGE error to
introduce after the M3 candidate has been produced.
What happened? Are our
adopter clients going to have the same problem?
Have we forgotten the
priniciple of not breaking adopters? (including our own adoption!!)
Have we forgotten the principle of deprecating function,
instead of just removing it? [kosta] Absolutely no reason to panic. The change was
unintentional. This is the type of problem we have automated builds to catch. I
will clear this up shortly.
Third, there is now 337 JUnit
failures!!! After the M3 candidate was produced?!
We should have been fixing the two JUnit failures, not adding more.
[kosta] While the
declared i-build seemed ok on the surface, it really wasn't and we are making
progress. While 337 seems like a large number, they are all likely a result of
one or two problems. I am investigating.
I
suspect there's perfectly reasonable explainations for all this, but thought I'd
send this note
to
make clear that those explainations should be documented here on wtp-releng for
all of
us to understand.
Do we need to revert something in the interst of stability?
[kosta] Not if we
want to make progress. It has been plenty evident that trying to sandbox large
changes does not subject them to sufficient testing to flush all the problems
out and you just have to work through the issues once the change is released.
Reverting doesn't accomplish much since it makes it impossible to debug/fix the
problems.
I should add that I appreciate agressive programming
... as long as it's done as a coordinated team,
and everyone can react
immediately (e.g. over the weekend), and as long as the impact to our
many
adopters is clear and well documnted.
Thank you.
Notice: This email message, together
with any attachments, may contain information of BEA Systems, Inc., its
subsidiaries and affiliated entities, that may be confidential, proprietary,
copyrighted and/or legally privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the
individual or entity named in this message. If you are not the intended
recipient, and have received this message in error, please immediately return
this by email and then delete it._______________________________________________
wtp-releng mailing
list
wtp-releng@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/wtp-releng
Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may contain information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries and affiliated entities, that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted and/or legally privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity named in this message. If you are not the intended recipient, and have received this message in error, please immediately return this by email and then delete it.