From river-dev-returnkwhite@example.com Wed Dec 01 00:44:13 2010 Return-Path: <river-dev-returnkwhite@example.com> Delivered-To: kwhite@example.com Received: (qmail 65909 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2010 00:44:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 1 Dec 2010 00:44:13 -0000 Received: (qmail 96840 invoked by uid 500); 1 Dec 2010 00:44:13 -0000 Delivered-To: kwhite@example.com Received: (qmail 96815 invoked by uid 500); 1 Dec 2010 00:44:13 -0000 Mailing-List: contact kwhite@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:kwhite@example.com> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:kwhite@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:kwhite@example.com> List-Id: <river-dev.incubator.apache.org> Reply-To: kwhite@example.com Delivered-To: mailing list kwhite@example.com Received: (qmail 96807 invoked by uid 99); 1 Dec 2010 00:44:13 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 00:44:13 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of kwhite@example.com designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO mail-qy0-f182.google.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 00:44:08 +0000 Received: by qyk36 with SMTP id 36so3364035qyk.6 for <kwhite@example.com>; Tue, 30 Nov 2010 16:43:48 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:mime-version:sender:received :in-reply-to:references:from:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id :subject:to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=JNIjXLjzQj1B8k4uuC0sRaI4Jgc6fDfYj41nGfdhVcw=; b=S7iRpuKGFFIlrQaZAkhN0pk7euZw0+O4VMAbmrRBKyv9RChCxSDwp/u0rnkiK7qQwq yR/LbO1px0L+QUDVuinh6x1F8WWhZrlvGxf5utkI4Kcl/KOhiVQ4kHfBmpznaUqs8lqK 5oxInoYopX3jUi+lH+zKZXs6Ql5w3zX2TlbgQ= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=uHl6iv+5MhO+4OGpxP9T1plmBHDJAgcQ7yZXAZ4S0AQvNv+CAIjhHLJOENcAmEsaKh vJLNiIZYmOm8hzbBDrL7+4cdw415dM1dWkSuP5Ax2ljFb5PHygzBiH/MWE46EOl1T3Hz xRkmEOsttUBZHJw0iMQU4SVT3iKsMyau8Jkd8= Received: by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP id kt5mr6844042qcb.25.1291164227223; Tue, 30 Nov 2010 16:43:47 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: kwhite@example.com Received: by 83.161.120.155 with HTTP; Tue, 30 Nov 2010 16:43:27 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <kwhite@example.com> References: <kwhite@example.com> From: Niclas Hedhman <kwhite@example.com> Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2010 08:43:27 +0800 X-Google-Sender-Auth: Cg9_ioANKoCH0ROzDMrc3VLUyyc Message-ID: <kwhite@example.com> Subject: Re: graduation To: kwhite@example.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 5:02 AM, Sim IJskes - QCG <kwhite@example.com> wrote: > Now that we have seen such a massive positive response to our roadmap > proposal, i'm not clear on what holds us back on graduation. > > Maybe the mentors can shed some light on the process ahead? > > I've read about the graduation and we need to go through several steps to > graduate. > > * Checking the Status File > * Community Graduation Vote > * Preparing a Charter > * The Recommendation Vote > * Submission of the Resolution to the Board AFAIK, preparing the charter is not a requirement previous to the establishment of the top level project. The Board will task the PMC to do this. Borrowing a charter from some other PMC is also a good starting point. Otherwise I think you list is "pretty much it". > Is the status file up to date, and have all the items been resolved? > Anybody? Review http://incubator.apache.org/projects/river.html --=20 Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer http://www.qi4j.org - New Energy for Java I=A0 live here; http://tinyurl.com/2qq9er I=A0 work here; http://tinyurl.com/2ymelc I relax here; http://tinyurl.com/2cgsug From river-dev-returnkwhite@example.com Wed Dec 01 07:30:20 2010 Return-Path: <river-dev-returnkwhite@example.com> Delivered-To: kwhite@example.com Received: (qmail 49099 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2010 07:30:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 1 Dec 2010 07:30:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 85007 invoked by uid 500); 1 Dec 2010 07:30:20 -0000 Delivered-To: kwhite@example.com Received: (qmail 84874 invoked by uid 500); 1 Dec 2010 07:30:19 -0000 Mailing-List: contact kwhite@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:kwhite@example.com> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:kwhite@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:kwhite@example.com> List-Id: <river-dev.incubator.apache.org> Reply-To: kwhite@example.com Delivered-To: mailing list kwhite@example.com Received: (qmail 84866 invoked by uid 99); 1 Dec 2010 07:30:18 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 07:30:18 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.2 required=10.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO v046695.home.net.pl) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with SMTP; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 07:30:10 +0000 Received: from mail-iw0-f175.google.com [83.161.120.155] (HELO mail-iw0-f175.google.com) by xpro.home.pl [83.161.120.155] with SMTP (IdeaSmtpServer v0.70) id 19d53528c6f2b832; Wed, 1 Dec 2010 08:30:25 +0100 Received: by iwn8 with SMTP id 8so5497851iwn.6 for <kwhite@example.com>; Tue, 30 Nov 2010 23:29:48 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP id s5mr5647387iba.114.1291188588434; Tue, 30 Nov 2010 23:29:48 -0800 (PST) Received: by 83.161.120.155 with HTTP; Tue, 30 Nov 2010 23:29:48 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <kwhite@example.com> References: <kwhite@example.com> <1290615485.15896.0.camel@cameron> <kwhite@example.com> <kwhite@example.com> Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2010 08:29:48 +0100 Message-ID: <kwhite@example.com> Subject: Re: informal roadmap votes collection From: =?UTF-8?B?TWljaGHFgiBLxYJlY3plaw==?= <kwhite@example.com> To: kwhite@example.com Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=00221534d2eb26d7c00496544550 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org --00221534d2eb26d7c00496544550 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 9:58 PM, Sim IJskes - QCG <kwhite@example.com> wrote: > I hope when it comes to a formal vote, the developers on the list will al= so > let their voices be heard. But preferably before we put it to official vo= te. > > I especially would like to hear from: > Gregg Wonderly > Jim Waldo > Mark Brouwer > Michal Kleczek > Patrick Wright > Zoltan Juhasz > > > # Roadmap > > * Gruadation as top level project river.apache.org > * rename com.sun namespace to org.apache.river > * modular build & JDK policy > > Mentors: > Niclas Hedhman: on same page with Jukka (=3D +1?) > Jukka Zitting: +1 > Benson Margulies: +1 > > Committers: > Sim IJskes: +1 > Tom Hobbs: +1 > Greg Trasuk: +1 > Patricia Shanahan: +1 > Peter Firmstone: +1 > Jonathan Costers: +1 > Jim Hurley: +1 > ... > > Developers: > Zsolt K=FAti: +1 > Jeff Ramsdale: +1 > Michael McGrady: +1 > Mike Morris: +1 > James Grahn: +1 > Dennis Reedy: +1 > > > > ... > > > Been somewhat busy lately... +1 Thanks, Michal --00221534d2eb26d7c00496544550-- From river-dev-returnkwhite@example.com Wed Dec 01 08:53:50 2010 Return-Path: <river-dev-returnkwhite@example.com> Delivered-To: kwhite@example.com Received: (qmail 78638 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2010 08:53:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 1 Dec 2010 08:53:49 -0000 Received: (qmail 79263 invoked by uid 500); 1 Dec 2010 08:53:49 -0000 Delivered-To: kwhite@example.com Received: (qmail 79127 invoked by uid 500); 1 Dec 2010 08:53:49 -0000 Mailing-List: contact kwhite@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:kwhite@example.com> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:kwhite@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:kwhite@example.com> List-Id: <river-dev.incubator.apache.org> Reply-To: kwhite@example.com Delivered-To: mailing list kwhite@example.com Received: (qmail 79119 invoked by uid 99); 1 Dec 2010 08:53:48 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 08:53:48 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.7 required=10.0 tests=SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO nyx.xs4all.nl) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 08:53:42 +0000 Received: from saturn.qcg.lan ([83.161.120.155]) by nyx.xs4all.nl with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <kwhite@example.com>) id 1PNiRF-00079V-FH for kwhite@example.com; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 09:53:21 +0100 Message-ID: <kwhite@example.com> Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2010 09:53:20 +0100 From: Sim IJskes - QCG <kwhite@example.com> Organization: Quality Consultancy Group b.v. User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:83.161.120.155) Gecko/20101027 Thunderbird/3.0.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: kwhite@example.com Subject: publishing website Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Tom, e.a. any objections against publishing staging? Gr. Sim -- QCG, Software voor het MKB, 071-5890970, http://www.qcg.nl Quality Consultancy Group b.v., Leiderdorp, Kvk Den Haag: 28088397 From river-dev-returnkwhite@example.com Wed Dec 01 09:11:41 2010 Return-Path: <river-dev-returnkwhite@example.com> Delivered-To: kwhite@example.com Received: (qmail 93242 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2010 09:11:41 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 1 Dec 2010 09:11:41 -0000 Received: (qmail 6199 invoked by uid 500); 1 Dec 2010 09:11:41 -0000 Delivered-To: kwhite@example.com Received: (qmail 6065 invoked by uid 500); 1 Dec 2010 09:11:40 -0000 Mailing-List: contact kwhite@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:kwhite@example.com> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:kwhite@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:kwhite@example.com> List-Id: <river-dev.incubator.apache.org> Reply-To: kwhite@example.com Delivered-To: mailing list kwhite@example.com Received: (qmail 6056 invoked by uid 99); 1 Dec 2010 09:11:40 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 09:11:40 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.7 required=10.0 tests=SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO nyx.xs4all.nl) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 09:11:35 +0000 Received: from saturn.qcg.lan ([83.161.120.155]) by nyx.xs4all.nl with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <kwhite@example.com>) id 1PNiiU-0007Qk-Mt for kwhite@example.com; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 10:11:10 +0100 Message-ID: <kwhite@example.com> Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2010 10:11:10 +0100 From: Sim IJskes - QCG <kwhite@example.com> Organization: Quality Consultancy Group b.v. User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:83.161.120.155) Gecko/20101027 Thunderbird/3.0.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: kwhite@example.com Subject: status file References: <kwhite@example.com> <kwhite@example.com> In-Reply-To: <kwhite@example.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 01-12-10 01:43, Niclas Hedhman wrote: >> Is the status file up to date, and have all the items been resolved? >> Anybody? > > Review http://incubator.apache.org/projects/river.html Dates missing: * Check and make sure that the papers that transfer rights to the ASF been received. It is only necessary to transfer rights for the package, the core code, and any new code produced by the project. * Check and make sure that the files that have been donated have been updated to reflect the new ASF copyright. Gr. Sim -- QCG, Software voor het MKB, 071-5890970, http://www.qcg.nl Quality Consultancy Group b.v., Leiderdorp, Kvk Den Haag: 28088397 From river-dev-returnkwhite@example.com Wed Dec 01 09:37:45 2010 Return-Path: <river-dev-returnkwhite@example.com> Delivered-To: kwhite@example.com Received: (qmail 99527 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2010 09:37:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 1 Dec 2010 09:37:45 -0000 Received: (qmail 36418 invoked by uid 500); 1 Dec 2010 09:37:45 -0000 Delivered-To: kwhite@example.com Received: (qmail 36284 invoked by uid 500); 1 Dec 2010 09:37:45 -0000 Mailing-List: contact kwhite@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:kwhite@example.com> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:kwhite@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:kwhite@example.com> List-Id: <river-dev.incubator.apache.org> Reply-To: kwhite@example.com Delivered-To: mailing list kwhite@example.com Received: (qmail 36276 invoked by uid 99); 1 Dec 2010 09:37:44 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 09:37:44 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.7 required=10.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RFC_ABUSE_POST,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of kwhite@example.com designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO mail-gy0-f175.google.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 09:37:38 +0000 Received: by gyd12 with SMTP id 12so3348373gyd.6 for <kwhite@example.com>; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 01:37:18 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=rLOQf+uKJrR1QaV80ZDxoHlbv3CeaONjtzSxPc8IhwU=; b=r6G7z0gnzrVzWn+AlNAwWeLhGVJV9GjYsXauD+9uA7fNcPb1iPhwsKgEEszDZk2QZ0 gHpg/LyWgVVStJGs0ucHDl+B1gIKSReYRUcLFttmxPnqpUnPahHB381T+JLKtdLsiAru nlSvQCNjv8I5T1S24FVLDTDT98QqI8uNJCE34= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=EWwkBFFu8YL2o0Y3gUgMxjdEWYWciTT72GGZbH4/zMDQGIWs2ILX/vHcqOIg4yBufa uG1hSAEeXOVh6YS+AHQXrC1hxYe9S80mWNQXzbyWkdId00HjGT/lrwjePBOVCu51TxW0 3eKUHcbZgT1xBibZMAEzIR+TOB6jSzUrFySTM= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP id n2mr14419162ybm.164.1291196237164; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 01:37:17 -0800 (PST) Received: by 83.161.120.155 with HTTP; Wed, 1 Dec 2010 01:37:17 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <kwhite@example.com> References: <kwhite@example.com> Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2010 09:37:17 +0000 Message-ID: <kwhite@example.com> Subject: Re: publishing website From: Tom Hobbs <kwhite@example.com> To: kwhite@example.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Once the build I've just kicked off finishes; kwhite@example.com. On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 8:53 AM, Sim IJskes - QCG <kwhite@example.com> wrote: > Tom, e.a. > > any objections against publishing staging? > > Gr. Sim > > -- > QCG, Software voor het MKB, 071-5890970, http://www.qcg.nl > Quality Consultancy Group b.v., Leiderdorp, Kvk Den Haag: 28088397 > From river-dev-returnkwhite@example.com Wed Dec 01 10:23:44 2010 Return-Path: <river-dev-returnkwhite@example.com> Delivered-To: kwhite@example.com Received: (qmail 23199 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2010 10:23:44 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 1 Dec 2010 10:23:44 -0000 Received: (qmail 27334 invoked by uid 500); 1 Dec 2010 10:23:44 -0000 Delivered-To: kwhite@example.com Received: (qmail 27200 invoked by uid 500); 1 Dec 2010 10:23:43 -0000 Mailing-List: contact kwhite@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:kwhite@example.com> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:kwhite@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:kwhite@example.com> List-Id: <river-dev.incubator.apache.org> Reply-To: kwhite@example.com Delivered-To: mailing list kwhite@example.com Received: (qmail 27191 invoked by uid 99); 1 Dec 2010 10:23:42 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 10:23:42 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.7 required=10.0 tests=SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO nyx.xs4all.nl) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 10:23:36 +0000 Received: from saturn.qcg.lan ([83.161.120.155]) by nyx.xs4all.nl with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <kwhite@example.com>) id 1PNjqF-0006ky-KX for kwhite@example.com; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 11:23:15 +0100 Message-ID: <kwhite@example.com> Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2010 11:23:14 +0100 From: Sim IJskes - QCG <kwhite@example.com> Reply-To: kwhite@example.com Organization: Quality Consultancy Group b.v. User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:83.161.120.155) Gecko/20101027 Thunderbird/3.0.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: kwhite@example.com Subject: status file References: <kwhite@example.com> <kwhite@example.com> In-Reply-To: <kwhite@example.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On 01-12-10 01:43, Niclas Hedhman wrote: >> Is the status file up to date, and have all the items been resolved? >> Anybody? > > Review http://incubator.apache.org/projects/river.html Dates missing: * Check and make sure that the papers that transfer rights to the ASF been received. It is only necessary to transfer rights for the package, the core code, and any new code produced by the project. * Check and make sure that the files that have been donated have been updated to reflect the new ASF copyright. How do we find out if these are cleared? Gr. Sim -- QCG, Software voor het MKB, 071-5890970, http://www.qcg.nl Quality Consultancy Group b.v., Leiderdorp, Kvk Den Haag: 28088397 From river-dev-returnkwhite@example.com Wed Dec 01 14:51:36 2010 Return-Path: <river-dev-returnkwhite@example.com> Delivered-To: kwhite@example.com Received: (qmail 32384 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2010 14:51:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 1 Dec 2010 14:51:35 -0000 Received: (qmail 93011 invoked by uid 500); 1 Dec 2010 14:51:35 -0000 Delivered-To: kwhite@example.com Received: (qmail 92878 invoked by uid 500); 1 Dec 2010 14:51:35 -0000 Mailing-List: contact kwhite@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:kwhite@example.com> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:kwhite@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:kwhite@example.com> List-Id: <river-dev.incubator.apache.org> Reply-To: kwhite@example.com Delivered-To: mailing list kwhite@example.com Received: (qmail 92869 invoked by uid 99); 1 Dec 2010 14:51:34 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 14:51:34 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.7 required=10.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of kwhite@example.com designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO mail-qy0-f175.google.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 14:51:29 +0000 Received: by qyk8 with SMTP id 8so2537131qyk.6 for <kwhite@example.com>; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 06:51:09 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:mime-version:sender:received :in-reply-to:references:from:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id :subject:to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=/iDFstOEUGZrfbKUSrLRaI9CS1QRFxWPYY0ndox8ytY=; b=une1Hy1wP3dqdG3BzFjS5kgB5zF2rUhn6U8igki1LqXK/H8U/xp7qh563BLZESkkeb UF73iR0cNPhQHIWNHJttNIgW/dAdySEHZvLTRi/eGOEN/G0mQDu/AX3czBl7onPUi0lt L4BgJzomUeddSXJ/6dVF2IM0E6ahGg+OWsh4c= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=Cd6Y4SKK+iWOCishTSWA/NrA4JVwSWWBD2jiR+Tt81tbxnmLIqqetGmM8T8gBuHlj9 OreVrXZcPtPuDlCl2KJjQxsvbKl18iT1zVL6Qb7HCNOJVmRQVFsHxmmoJFIt4zBXFMZ1 UdCuDO9dnnEjOfAVlQQ9K98ZwALdse3r+ICIk= Received: by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP id iy12mr7476218qcb.101.1291215068835; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 06:51:08 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: kwhite@example.com Received: by 83.161.120.155 with HTTP; Wed, 1 Dec 2010 06:50:48 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <kwhite@example.com> References: <kwhite@example.com> <kwhite@example.com> <kwhite@example.com> From: Niclas Hedhman <kwhite@example.com> Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2010 22:50:48 +0800 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 7UYBPPN36jAIcwKY9fst0ChoIMU Message-ID: <kwhite@example.com> Subject: Re: status file To: kwhite@example.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 6:23 PM, Sim IJskes - QCG <kwhite@example.com> wrote: > On 01-12-10 01:43, Niclas Hedhman wrote: >>> >>> Is the status file up to date, and have all the items been resolved? >>> Anybody? >> >> Review =A0http://incubator.apache.org/projects/river.html > > Dates missing: > > * Check and make sure that the papers that transfer rights to the ASF bee= n > received. It is only necessary to transfer rights for the package, the co= re > code, and any new code produced by the project. > > * Check and make sure that the files that have been donated have been > updated to reflect the new ASF copyright. > > How do we find out if these are cleared? I should be sitting "somewhere" in the ASF subversion repository. Where? I am not sure. Either in Incubator's public repo or worst case in foundation private repository, accessible by Members only. Jukka? Benson? Got any clue where to start looking? AFAIR, all this was handled very early (before my time as Mentor), and all rights needed were cleared, (incl Jini trademark, right?).... Cheers --=20 Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer http://www.qi4j.org - New Energy for Java I=A0 live here; http://tinyurl.com/2qq9er I=A0 work here; http://tinyurl.com/2ymelc I relax here; http://tinyurl.com/2cgsug From river-dev-returnkwhite@example.com Wed Dec 01 15:14:04 2010 Return-Path: <river-dev-returnkwhite@example.com> Delivered-To: kwhite@example.com Received: (qmail 46871 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2010 15:14:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 1 Dec 2010 15:14:04 -0000 Received: (qmail 29212 invoked by uid 500); 1 Dec 2010 15:14:04 -0000 Delivered-To: kwhite@example.com Received: (qmail 29076 invoked by uid 500); 1 Dec 2010 15:14:03 -0000 Mailing-List: contact kwhite@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:kwhite@example.com> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:kwhite@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:kwhite@example.com> List-Id: <river-dev.incubator.apache.org> Reply-To: kwhite@example.com Delivered-To: mailing list kwhite@example.com Received: (qmail 29068 invoked by uid 99); 1 Dec 2010 15:14:02 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 15:14:02 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests=RFC_ABUSE_POST,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of kwhite@example.com designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO mailout11.yourhostingaccount.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 15:13:56 +0000 Received: from mailscan13.yourhostingaccount.com ([83.161.120.155] helo=mailscan13.yourhostingaccount.com) by mailout11.yourhostingaccount.com with esmtp (Exim) id 1PNoNC-0004jV-Q9 for kwhite@example.com; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 10:13:34 -0500 Received: from impout03.yourhostingaccount.com ([83.161.120.155] helo=impout03.yourhostingaccount.com) by mailscan13.yourhostingaccount.com with esmtp (Exim) id 1PNoNB-0006pK-N1; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 10:13:33 -0500 Received: from authsmtp06.yourhostingaccount.com ([83.161.120.155]) by impout03.yourhostingaccount.com with NO UCE id drDZ1f00107rVmq0000000; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 10:13:33 -0500 X-EN-OrigOutIP: 83.161.120.155 X-EN-IMPSID: drDZ1f00107rVmq0000000 Received: from ip70-189-103-32.ok.ok.cox.net ([83.161.120.155] helo=[83.161.120.155]) by authsmtp06.yourhostingaccount.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim) id 1PNoNA-00080Q-HB; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 10:13:32 -0500 Message-ID: <kwhite@example.com> Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2010 09:13:27 -0600 From: Gregg Wonderly <kwhite@example.com> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:83.161.120.155) Gecko/20101027 Thunderbird/3.1.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: kwhite@example.com CC: Peter Firmstone <kwhite@example.com> Subject: Re: Jini Community Projects on Java.net WAS: Re: java.net References: <kwhite@example.com> <kwhite@example.com> In-Reply-To: <kwhite@example.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-EN-UserInfo: 5bac21c6012e8295aaee92c67842fba3:d1e94006e19829b2b3cf849ab9ff0f3c X-EN-AuthUser: greggwon Sender: Gregg Wonderly <kwhite@example.com> X-EN-OrigIP: 83.161.120.155 X-EN-OrigHost: ip70-189-103-32.ok.ok.cox.net I have requested that jini.dev.java.net be moved and I've requested that my individual projects be moved. Any other projects own by others need to be dealt with pronto. All users should have received emails about needed action. Gregg Wonderly On 11/24/2010 5:19 AM, Peter Firmstone wrote: > There are a lot of Jini Community projects on Java.net which are probably stagnant. > > Do we know if any of these projects will be moved? > > It looks like they're all going to go the way of the dinosaur unless we preserve > their source. > > Looks like we've got 6 days left to copy these projects. It will be a > significant loss if we don't. > > Peter. > > Niclas Hedhman wrote: >> Has this been discussed?? >> >> <quote> >> ACTION REQUIRED: Java.net is migrating to a new infrastructure and >> project owners must request that projects be moved by November 30, >> 2010. A list of projects that will be moved is here: >> http://java.net/projects/help/pages/RequestedProjects For more details >> please see the Community Manager's blog - >> http://www.java.net/blog/30701 >> </quote> >> >> >> Cheers > > From river-dev-returnkwhite@example.com Wed Dec 01 15:20:14 2010 Return-Path: <river-dev-returnkwhite@example.com> Delivered-To: kwhite@example.com Received: (qmail 48287 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2010 15:20:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 1 Dec 2010 15:20:14 -0000 Received: (qmail 34387 invoked by uid 500); 1 Dec 2010 15:20:14 -0000 Delivered-To: kwhite@example.com Received: (qmail 34354 invoked by uid 500); 1 Dec 2010 15:20:13 -0000 Mailing-List: contact kwhite@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:kwhite@example.com> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:kwhite@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:kwhite@example.com> List-Id: <river-dev.incubator.apache.org> Reply-To: kwhite@example.com Delivered-To: mailing list kwhite@example.com Received: (qmail 34346 invoked by uid 99); 1 Dec 2010 15:20:13 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 15:20:13 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.7 required=10.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of kwhite@example.com designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO mail-iw0-f175.google.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 15:20:08 +0000 Received: by iwn8 with SMTP id 8so5937963iwn.6 for <kwhite@example.com>; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 07:19:48 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:mime-version:received:in-reply-to :references:from:date:message-id:subject:to:content-type; bh=j1poZ7rzCJcKqT5caGCWjL3/VDpcJMZuQJ1nFYEulzM=; b=EZj/jtq57b2F2/sOQMwumzkd5QGROX4JWYoUye4eufidkn5ppDjpqmaRBPeU7Mha36 QM6fiQjQPqkHLLZrCpuHOKvlKQ69R/0uZw/Sqc3t+CkTvEnf3CZ/BscT8huI/sHPlws0 C7sePRKd/z6qDp7BYHnXAGkSonsmf4FqUneS4= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type; b=p3cQjJUcL1TsM5jeR6IsKhQgKYhkL7YXU4TsFyK1aCMmbUeB2/IXKagoq1rnrJimxj EM+iAAmEJaWDjpTpd/jeAHeMLl3jNtQzcQ4oSyEgaNv9CDVsItbH+RYHRpoCxMa+q5zw oZZ+a7cL+ZqxwhfKUb+4Io6xW5M/Y8BjP4e7k= Received: by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP id dk16mr6022730ibb.89.1291216788025; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 07:19:48 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 83.161.120.155 with HTTP; Wed, 1 Dec 2010 07:19:27 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <kwhite@example.com> References: <kwhite@example.com> <kwhite@example.com> <kwhite@example.com> <kwhite@example.com> From: Jukka Zitting <kwhite@example.com> Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2010 16:19:27 +0100 Message-ID: <kwhite@example.com> Subject: Re: status file To: kwhite@example.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Hi, On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 3:50 PM, Niclas Hedhman <kwhite@example.com> wrote: > On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 6:23 PM, Sim IJskes - QCG <kwhite@example.com> wrote: >> * Check and make sure that the papers that transfer rights to the ASF been >> received. It is only necessary to transfer rights for the package, the core >> code, and any new code produced by the project. > > I should be sitting "somewhere" in the ASF subversion repository. > Where? I am not sure. Either in Incubator's public repo or worst case > in foundation private repository, accessible by Members only. > > Jukka? Benson? Got any clue where to start looking? The records are stored inside the ASF-private repository. The relevant software grant is dated April 18th, 2007 and covers the "JINI Technology Starter Kit (v.2.1)" and "QATests" codebases for Apache River. There's also a CCLA schedule B document dated January 17th, 2007 that covers "Sun's contributions to the 'River' project", and a CCLA document dated January 27th, 2007 for Artima's contribution of the ServiceUI API. >> * Check and make sure that the files that have been donated have been >> updated to reflect the new ASF copyright. As far as I can tell we have the correct license headers everywhere. The exact date of clearing these status entries isn't as important as the fact that they have been cleared, so you can just enter today's date based on the above information. BR, Jukka Zitting From river-dev-returnkwhite@example.com Wed Dec 01 15:22:45 2010 Return-Path: <river-dev-returnkwhite@example.com> Delivered-To: kwhite@example.com Received: (qmail 48825 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2010 15:22:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 1 Dec 2010 15:22:45 -0000 Received: (qmail 41330 invoked by uid 500); 1 Dec 2010 15:22:45 -0000 Delivered-To: kwhite@example.com Received: (qmail 41198 invoked by uid 500); 1 Dec 2010 15:22:45 -0000 Mailing-List: contact kwhite@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:kwhite@example.com> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:kwhite@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:kwhite@example.com> List-Id: <river-dev.incubator.apache.org> Reply-To: kwhite@example.com Delivered-To: mailing list kwhite@example.com Received: (qmail 41189 invoked by uid 99); 1 Dec 2010 15:22:44 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 15:22:44 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.5 required=10.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RFC_ABUSE_POST,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of kwhite@example.com designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO mail-wy0-f175.google.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 15:22:40 +0000 Received: by wyb40 with SMTP id 40so7169640wyb.6 for <kwhite@example.com>; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 07:22:18 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=RDMhp3T147pItzMUTVST74ydsR/LZ9BIhzrh1hOsy/s=; b=DiumQRXXLMwRAYFWt13Bm1StXt/5Q3X0StriUOdSmE0rgX9iGeuN/1ZLG1ZWUgXYRh JOapavW4wTpbQu+/q4mdUBW5B1r1HkR57J8IcX1GmM0H7PQ3s5A8jjHmabPmTX9S9OYt q7j2kNKeDyIR9v2MnA1MhVHS5E7do6n9Co+iE= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=q1B8jnIjV0b2p+85aeDTpTFsNvplTzrmIv6oNOFQNNs7+xiFPwLAUZaylrusbrugPr KOa396SiVOzoUREwYBQkdvfSQ44eDHcjRgrW5ZM6oQB0rAcTXYNH5ps2rASwN5D25o4A TN32MWlmHIRsLaIXhf4ebbOnJJHLddBa5JidE= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP id a53mr7630597wel.94.1291216938727; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 07:22:18 -0800 (PST) Received: by 83.161.120.155 with HTTP; Wed, 1 Dec 2010 07:22:18 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <kwhite@example.com> References: <kwhite@example.com> Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2010 16:22:18 +0100 Message-ID: <kwhite@example.com> Subject: Re: hudson matrix build From: Jonathan Costers <kwhite@example.com> To: kwhite@example.com Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016367fadcff60b6f04965ade15 --0016367fadcff60b6f04965ade15 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 2010/11/30 Sim IJskes - QCG <kwhite@example.com> > I've tried to create a hudson QA testing system: > > River-QA-runtime: building the runtime (jars). > River-QA: matrix job triggered by River-QA-runtime > > Excellent! What codebase is exactly being tested by these? The trunk? A specific branch/tag? Should we enable QA testing of whatever codebase we require? > River-QA runs all combinations from systems and categories as separate > jobs. Unfortunately every combination requires a workspace (right now) and > the builds crew have called it a 'less optimal solution'. I think they are > just beeing polite. > > So clearly until a new hudson version is released where the workspace can > be shared between combinations, we cannot use this job. > > Note that there is an additional dimension to the QA harness: the configuration it will run the tests under. At this moment, the configuration that is used is "none". Other possibilities include "http", "https", "jeri", "jrmp", jsse" and "kerberos" IIRC. Any combination of these can be passed to the harness at runtime, by using the harness.config Ant property (see qa/build.xml). > Maybe any of the developers on the list has a good idea, so that we can > still make use of the matrix build system? > > Gr. Sim > > -- > QCG, Software voor het MKB, 071-5890970, http://www.qcg.nl > Quality Consultancy Group b.v., Leiderdorp, Kvk Den Haag: 28088397 > --0016367fadcff60b6f04965ade15-- From river-dev-returnkwhite@example.com Wed Dec 01 15:24:35 2010 Return-Path: <river-dev-returnkwhite@example.com> Delivered-To: kwhite@example.com Received: (qmail 49115 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2010 15:24:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 1 Dec 2010 15:24:35 -0000 Received: (qmail 42264 invoked by uid 500); 1 Dec 2010 15:24:35 -0000 Delivered-To: kwhite@example.com Received: (qmail 42172 invoked by uid 500); 1 Dec 2010 15:24:34 -0000 Mailing-List: contact kwhite@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:kwhite@example.com> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:kwhite@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:kwhite@example.com> List-Id: <river-dev.incubator.apache.org> Reply-To: kwhite@example.com Delivered-To: mailing list kwhite@example.com Received: (qmail 42164 invoked by uid 99); 1 Dec 2010 15:24:34 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 15:24:34 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests=RFC_ABUSE_POST,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of kwhite@example.com designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO mailout08.yourhostingaccount.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 15:24:25 +0000 Received: from mailscan03.yourhostingaccount.com ([83.161.120.155] helo=mailscan03.yourhostingaccount.com) by mailout08.yourhostingaccount.com with esmtp (Exim) id 1PNoXM-0000BZ-7Z for kwhite@example.com; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 10:24:04 -0500 Received: from impout03.yourhostingaccount.com ([83.161.120.155] helo=impout03.yourhostingaccount.com) by mailscan03.yourhostingaccount.com with esmtp (Exim) id 1PNoXM-0005Ie-1V; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 10:24:04 -0500 Received: from authsmtp11.yourhostingaccount.com ([83.161.120.155]) by impout03.yourhostingaccount.com with NO UCE id drQ31f0040EKrUA0000000; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 10:24:03 -0500 X-EN-OrigOutIP: 83.161.120.155 X-EN-IMPSID: drQ31f0040EKrUA0000000 Received: from ip70-189-103-32.ok.ok.cox.net ([83.161.120.155] helo=[83.161.120.155]) by authsmtp11.yourhostingaccount.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim) id 1PNoXI-0002vR-76; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 10:24:00 -0500 Message-ID: <kwhite@example.com> Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2010 09:23:54 -0600 From: Gregg Wonderly <kwhite@example.com> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:83.161.120.155) Gecko/20101027 Thunderbird/3.1.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: kwhite@example.com CC: Sim IJskes - QCG <kwhite@example.com> Subject: Re: JVM version policy Was: Re: Build failed in Hudson: River-trunk-jdk1.5 #3 References: <862502422.8331290517859184.JavaMail.hudson@aegis> <112459958.8391290520715806.JavaMail.hudson@aegis> <kwhite@example.com> <kwhite@example.com> <kwhite@example.com> <kwhite@example.com> <kwhite@example.com> <kwhite@example.com> <kwhite@example.com> <kwhite@example.com> <kwhite@example.com> In-Reply-To: <kwhite@example.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-EN-UserInfo: 5bac21c6012e8295aaee92c67842fba3:d1e94006e19829b2b3cf849ab9ff0f3c X-EN-AuthUser: greggwon Sender: Gregg Wonderly <kwhite@example.com> X-EN-OrigIP: 83.161.120.155 X-EN-OrigHost: ip70-189-103-32.ok.ok.cox.net X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org River's primary feature is network based communications and long running services with "compatibility" as a "key behavior" that makes things continue to work. The original RMI implementation was unchangable from the outside. The addition of JERI made "communication protocols" a deployment decision. However, discovery still has to be "compatible" and we need to make real effort on "namespace" compatibility after the "switch to org.apache". People will be forking river right and left and contributing nothing if we don't try very hard to "worry about compatibility" and "make it happen when at all possible". These are not desktop applications that get replaced by individual users randomly so they can take advantage of upgrades when they want. This is about network based services with broadcast client deployment via ServiceUI, much like a web page is. Since river is "infrastructure" and not "the service", we need to help users experience minimum impact on their deployments so that they can easily adopt new releases of river that include bug fixes for example. The work that Patricia is doing to shake out transaction manager misbehaviors and probably leasing issues too, is the kind of "fixes" that we want everyone to be able to "accept" with "trivial compatibility issues". Gregg Wonderly On 11/24/2010 8:40 AM, Sim IJskes - QCG wrote: > On 11/24/2010 03:11 PM, Patricia Shanahan wrote: > >> If we had started a formal vote, the qualification might indicate that >> we had not yet done enough discussing. I suggest we continue discussing >> a little longer, and then call a vote. We will probably be able to reach >> a consensus proposal that will get a lot of definite positive votes. > > I'm aware off the differences between a formal and a informal vote. A informal > vote however is a clear indication how one will vote when a formal vote is called. > > I can understand you want to go throught due process in determining what we are > going to do. But my personal impression from the mailing list archives, is that > the river project is completely gridlocked in subtleties. I'm not saying that > something agreed has a lifetime of infinity, but we have to start somewhere. > That means quick, decisive action, while keeping our options open. > > Suppose we declare to support 1.4, 1.5, 1.6 and CDC. How do we validate this? I > don't see us building a compatibity verification on short notice. > > If you want to go for river worlddomination, by keeping everything compatible, > you should bring a large suitcase of money. Then you can checkout an older > revision from the repo and build something with the horde of programmers you are > hiring. > > River has to grow from spurts from contributors, we are not going to win a race > by creating a swamp. I strongly believe that the current failure of river is > because of this longwinding process. We are not going to attract more young > eager bright committers if we keep on discussing the future of river or the > subtleties of compatibility. > > Gr. Sim > > From river-dev-returnkwhite@example.com Wed Dec 01 15:25:32 2010 Return-Path: <river-dev-returnkwhite@example.com> Delivered-To: kwhite@example.com Received: (qmail 49363 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2010 15:25:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 1 Dec 2010 15:25:31 -0000 Received: (qmail 45146 invoked by uid 500); 1 Dec 2010 15:25:31 -0000 Delivered-To: kwhite@example.com Received: (qmail 45120 invoked by uid 500); 1 Dec 2010 15:25:31 -0000 Mailing-List: contact kwhite@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:kwhite@example.com> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:kwhite@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:kwhite@example.com> List-Id: <river-dev.incubator.apache.org> Reply-To: kwhite@example.com Delivered-To: mailing list kwhite@example.com Received: (qmail 45112 invoked by uid 99); 1 Dec 2010 15:25:31 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 15:25:31 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.5 required=10.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of kwhite@example.com designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO mail-wy0-f175.google.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 15:25:26 +0000 Received: by wyb40 with SMTP id 40so7172327wyb.6 for <kwhite@example.com>; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 07:25:05 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=A7uFXqCYN5tHwX4/gFlki2F5zsNinB4XxazEaBQXG2I=; b=s+8Hd3iXtyWUKY0bLFSx1Gs8pnujrkIRLXBCp8soNnf5x52qnz3EO+0Lmo/e4Lsu1f N1NPHBnmnkVcvB2w3dH33zjUywntltleg3fA4pBlgGTsyyxVks95YqkC72a2/z5jmNjQ FbJU0hv38+Sz8yGIfCmJSA+m9/UiCUHnUcwJc= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=XTPJD/pK2iuyADULmB36FrBLGTBoCs0/dDf/sCVe5TjNm0wVN+JN/IytLcncuKPDQ6 x8ZPDRXOZr5NuaU1PI54X7CNkou6o8o73ZbTaCSS0U39elQAhuuKgBhQeAjTFMsAnB4S IxuDKuAlo7pgyqaUbh/NE+ifOrD4UPXIgYK+I= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP id x4mr2162818wex.81.1291217105023; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 07:25:05 -0800 (PST) Received: by 83.161.120.155 with HTTP; Wed, 1 Dec 2010 07:25:04 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <kwhite@example.com> References: <kwhite@example.com> <kwhite@example.com> <kwhite@example.com> Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2010 10:25:04 -0500 Message-ID: <kwhite@example.com> Subject: Re: Jini Community Projects on Java.net WAS: Re: java.net From: Sam Chance <kwhite@example.com> To: kwhite@example.com Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016e6dbe2d9df8d0604965ae802 --0016e6dbe2d9df8d0604965ae802 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Greg, Are your various Jini/River related projects listed on-line somewhere? Thank you! Sam On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 10:13 AM, Gregg Wonderly <kwhite@example.com> wrote: > I have requested that jini.dev.java.net be moved and I've requested that > my individual projects be moved. Any other projects own by others need to > be dealt with pronto. All users should have received emails about needed > action. > > Gregg Wonderly > > On 11/24/2010 5:19 AM, Peter Firmstone wrote: > >> There are a lot of Jini Community projects on Java.net which are probably >> stagnant. >> >> Do we know if any of these projects will be moved? >> >> It looks like they're all going to go the way of the dinosaur unless we >> preserve >> their source. >> >> Looks like we've got 6 days left to copy these projects. It will be a >> significant loss if we don't. >> >> Peter. >> >> Niclas Hedhman wrote: >> >>> Has this been discussed?? >>> >>> <quote> >>> ACTION REQUIRED: Java.net is migrating to a new infrastructure and >>> project owners must request that projects be moved by November 30, >>> 2010. A list of projects that will be moved is here: >>> http://java.net/projects/help/pages/RequestedProjects For more details >>> please see the Community Manager's blog - >>> http://www.java.net/blog/30701 >>> </quote> >>> >>> >>> Cheers >>> >> >> >> > --0016e6dbe2d9df8d0604965ae802-- From river-dev-returnkwhite@example.com Wed Dec 01 15:31:50 2010 Return-Path: <river-dev-returnkwhite@example.com> Delivered-To: kwhite@example.com Received: (qmail 51945 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2010 15:31:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 1 Dec 2010 15:31:49 -0000 Received: (qmail 60590 invoked by uid 500); 1 Dec 2010 15:31:49 -0000 Delivered-To: kwhite@example.com Received: (qmail 60510 invoked by uid 500); 1 Dec 2010 15:31:49 -0000 Mailing-List: contact kwhite@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:kwhite@example.com> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:kwhite@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:kwhite@example.com> List-Id: <river-dev.incubator.apache.org> Reply-To: kwhite@example.com Delivered-To: mailing list kwhite@example.com Received: (qmail 60502 invoked by uid 99); 1 Dec 2010 15:31:49 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 15:31:49 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests=RFC_ABUSE_POST,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of kwhite@example.com designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO mailout04.yourhostingaccount.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 15:31:39 +0000 Received: from mailscan15.yourhostingaccount.com ([83.161.120.155] helo=mailscan15.yourhostingaccount.com) by mailout04.yourhostingaccount.com with esmtp (Exim) id 1PNoeN-0002p6-7R for kwhite@example.com; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 10:31:19 -0500 Received: from impout03.yourhostingaccount.com ([83.161.120.155] helo=impout03.yourhostingaccount.com) by mailscan15.yourhostingaccount.com with esmtp (Exim) id 1PNoeM-0007Vm-Kv; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 10:31:18 -0500 Received: from authsmtp11.yourhostingaccount.com ([83.161.120.155]) by impout03.yourhostingaccount.com with NO UCE id drXJ1f0030EKrUA0000000; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 10:31:18 -0500 X-EN-OrigOutIP: 83.161.120.155 X-EN-IMPSID: drXJ1f0030EKrUA0000000 Received: from ip70-189-103-32.ok.ok.cox.net ([83.161.120.155] helo=[83.161.120.155]) by authsmtp11.yourhostingaccount.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim) id 1PNoeM-0001gH-6c; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 10:31:18 -0500 Message-ID: <kwhite@example.com> Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2010 09:31:13 -0600 From: Gregg Wonderly <kwhite@example.com> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:83.161.120.155) Gecko/20101027 Thunderbird/3.1.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: kwhite@example.com CC: Sim IJskes - QCG <kwhite@example.com> Subject: Re: informal roadmap votes collection References: <kwhite@example.com> <1290615485.15896.0.camel@cameron> <kwhite@example.com> <kwhite@example.com> In-Reply-To: <kwhite@example.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-EN-UserInfo: 5bac21c6012e8295aaee92c67842fba3:d1e94006e19829b2b3cf849ab9ff0f3c X-EN-AuthUser: greggwon Sender: Gregg Wonderly <kwhite@example.com> X-EN-OrigIP: 83.161.120.155 X-EN-OrigHost: ip70-189-103-32.ok.ok.cox.net X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org I think this is the right order/priority for every ones efforts. Gregg On 11/24/2010 12:17 PM, Sim IJskes - QCG wrote: > # Roadmap > > * Gruadation as top level project river.apache.org > * rename com.sun namespace to org.apache.river > * modular build & JDK policy > > Mentors: > Niclas Hedhman: ? > Jukka Zitting: +1 > Benson Margulies: +1 > > Committers: > Sim IJskes: +1 > Tom Hobbs: +1 > Greg Trasuk: +1 > Patricia Shanahan: +1 > ... > > Developers: > ... > > > From river-dev-returnkwhite@example.com Wed Dec 01 16:04:26 2010 Return-Path: <river-dev-returnkwhite@example.com> Delivered-To: kwhite@example.com Received: (qmail 63028 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2010 16:04:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 1 Dec 2010 16:04:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 33140 invoked by uid 500); 1 Dec 2010 16:04:26 -0000 Delivered-To: kwhite@example.com Received: (qmail 32999 invoked by uid 500); 1 Dec 2010 16:04:25 -0000 Mailing-List: contact kwhite@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:kwhite@example.com> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:kwhite@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:kwhite@example.com> List-Id: <river-dev.incubator.apache.org> Reply-To: kwhite@example.com Delivered-To: mailing list kwhite@example.com Received: (qmail 32991 invoked by uid 99); 1 Dec 2010 16:04:24 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 16:04:24 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests=RFC_ABUSE_POST,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of kwhite@example.com designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO mailout14.yourhostingaccount.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 16:04:16 +0000 Received: from mailscan02.yourhostingaccount.com ([83.161.120.155] helo=mailscan02.yourhostingaccount.com) by mailout14.yourhostingaccount.com with esmtp (Exim) id 1PNp9v-0002Cw-Ul for kwhite@example.com; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 11:03:55 -0500 Received: from impout03.yourhostingaccount.com ([83.161.120.155] helo=impout03.yourhostingaccount.com) by mailscan02.yourhostingaccount.com with esmtp (Exim) id 1PNp9v-0001QZ-E7; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 11:03:55 -0500 Received: from authsmtp11.yourhostingaccount.com ([83.161.120.155]) by impout03.yourhostingaccount.com with NO UCE id ds3v1f0050EKrUA0000000; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 11:03:55 -0500 X-EN-OrigOutIP: 83.161.120.155 X-EN-IMPSID: ds3v1f0050EKrUA0000000 Received: from ip70-189-103-32.ok.ok.cox.net ([83.161.120.155] helo=[83.161.120.155]) by authsmtp11.yourhostingaccount.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim) id 1PNp9u-0005OQ-Sr; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 11:03:55 -0500 Message-ID: <kwhite@example.com> Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2010 10:03:49 -0600 From: Gregg Wonderly <kwhite@example.com> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:83.161.120.155) Gecko/20101027 Thunderbird/3.1.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: kwhite@example.com CC: Patricia Shanahan <kwhite@example.com> Subject: Re: QA speed improvement References: <kwhite@example.com> <kwhite@example.com> <kwhite@example.com> <kwhite@example.com> <kwhite@example.com> <kwhite@example.com> In-Reply-To: <kwhite@example.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-EN-UserInfo: 5bac21c6012e8295aaee92c67842fba3:d1e94006e19829b2b3cf849ab9ff0f3c X-EN-AuthUser: greggwon Sender: Gregg Wonderly <kwhite@example.com> X-EN-OrigIP: 83.161.120.155 X-EN-OrigHost: ip70-189-103-32.ok.ok.cox.net In many cases, there is not a shutdown hook registered when there could be. Reggie, Mahalo and Norm in particular, having "subscription" based use, should notify their users immediately apon catchable VM shutdown. The mechanism provided by Runtime.getRuntime().addShutdownHook(Runnable) should be used everywhere we can to "speed up" the notification of process failures. Gregg Wonderly On 11/26/2010 8:21 AM, Patricia Shanahan wrote: > Sim IJskes - QCG wrote: >> On 26-11-10 14:42, Patricia Shanahan wrote: >>>>> 2. Ensuring that the River features that are used during the current >>>>> teardown are tested in some other way. >>>> >>>> But only if the teardown is already part of the testresult. Is it? >>> >>> Whether or not a teardown failure gets reflected in the test result, we >>> would learn about it soon enough under current conditions, due e.g. to >>> non-running of subsequent tests. I suspect we do have the formal test >>> coverage, but I'll take a look at what teardown uses now, and check. >> >> What worries me a little is the state the operating system keeps on terminated >> processes. We know of the SO_REUSEADDR issue, but you seem to experience the >> non-release of resources on process termination. formally a OS bug, but if so >> is something we need to workaround. How definate are you on your reports where >> you have problems rerunning a test caused by the OS not releasing resources on >> VM exit? > > I see two issues here: > > 1. Terminating every VM. > > 2. Deleting any temporary files. > > Empirically, a Ctrl-C termination often leaves the system in a state in which > subsequent tests fail. > > Patricia > From river-dev-returnkwhite@example.com Wed Dec 01 16:27:29 2010 Return-Path: <river-dev-returnkwhite@example.com> Delivered-To: kwhite@example.com Received: (qmail 78448 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2010 16:27:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 1 Dec 2010 16:27:29 -0000 Received: (qmail 80065 invoked by uid 500); 1 Dec 2010 16:27:29 -0000 Delivered-To: kwhite@example.com Received: (qmail 79931 invoked by uid 500); 1 Dec 2010 16:27:27 -0000 Mailing-List: contact kwhite@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:kwhite@example.com> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:kwhite@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:kwhite@example.com> List-Id: <river-dev.incubator.apache.org> Reply-To: kwhite@example.com Delivered-To: mailing list kwhite@example.com Received: (qmail 79923 invoked by uid 99); 1 Dec 2010 16:27:26 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 16:27:26 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.3 required=10.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO rcsinet10.oracle.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 16:27:18 +0000 Received: from rcsinet13.oracle.com (rcsinet13.oracle.com [83.161.120.155]) by rcsinet10.oracle.com (Switch-3.4.2/Switch-3.4.2) with ESMTP id oB1GQt4D015944 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for <kwhite@example.com>; Wed, 1 Dec 2010 16:26:57 GMT Received: from acsmt353.oracle.com (acsmt353.oracle.com [83.161.120.155]) by rcsinet13.oracle.com (Switch-3.4.2/Switch-3.4.1) with ESMTP id oB1GKNA7016225 for <kwhite@example.com>; Wed, 1 Dec 2010 16:26:48 GMT Received: from abhmt012.oracle.com by acsmt354.oracle.com with ESMTP id 832559591291220798; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 08:26:38 -0800 Received: from [83.161.120.155] (/83.161.120.155) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 08:26:38 -0800 Message-Id: <kwhite@example.com> From: Craig L Russell <kwhite@example.com> To: kwhite@example.com In-Reply-To: <kwhite@example.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: status file Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v936) Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2010 08:26:36 -0800 References: <kwhite@example.com> <kwhite@example.com> <kwhite@example.com> <kwhite@example.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.936) X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Probably the biggest single donation is recorded from Sun Microsystems for: Jini technology starter kit (v 2.1) and QA tests dated 18 April 2007. I didn't see any other grants of technology in the records. Craig On Dec 1, 2010, at 6:50 AM, Niclas Hedhman wrote: > On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 6:23 PM, Sim IJskes - QCG <kwhite@example.com> wrote: >> On 01-12-10 01:43, Niclas Hedhman wrote: >>>> >>>> Is the status file up to date, and have all the items been >>>> resolved? >>>> Anybody? >>> >>> Review http://incubator.apache.org/projects/river.html >> >> Dates missing: >> >> * Check and make sure that the papers that transfer rights to the >> ASF been >> received. It is only necessary to transfer rights for the package, >> the core >> code, and any new code produced by the project. >> >> * Check and make sure that the files that have been donated have been >> updated to reflect the new ASF copyright. >> >> How do we find out if these are cleared? > > I should be sitting "somewhere" in the ASF subversion repository. > Where? I am not sure. Either in Incubator's public repo or worst case > in foundation private repository, accessible by Members only. > > Jukka? Benson? Got any clue where to start looking? > > AFAIR, all this was handled very early (before my time as Mentor), and > all rights needed were cleared, (incl Jini trademark, right?).... > > > Cheers > -- > Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer > http://www.qi4j.org - New Energy for Java > > I live here; http://tinyurl.com/2qq9er > I work here; http://tinyurl.com/2ymelc > I relax here; http://tinyurl.com/2cgsug Craig L Russell Architect, Oracle http://db.apache.org/jdo (600)620-5323 mailto:kwhite@example.com P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp! From river-dev-returnkwhite@example.com Wed Dec 01 16:41:38 2010 Return-Path: <river-dev-returnkwhite@example.com> Delivered-To: kwhite@example.com Received: (qmail 83666 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2010 16:41:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 1 Dec 2010 16:41:37 -0000 Received: (qmail 20411 invoked by uid 500); 1 Dec 2010 16:41:37 -0000 Delivered-To: kwhite@example.com Received: (qmail 20276 invoked by uid 500); 1 Dec 2010 16:41:36 -0000 Mailing-List: contact kwhite@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:kwhite@example.com> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:kwhite@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:kwhite@example.com> List-Id: <river-dev.incubator.apache.org> Reply-To: kwhite@example.com Delivered-To: mailing list kwhite@example.com Received: (qmail 20268 invoked by uid 99); 1 Dec 2010 16:41:36 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 16:41:36 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RFC_ABUSE_POST,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of kwhite@example.com designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO mailout07.yourhostingaccount.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 16:41:27 +0000 Received: from mailscan17.yourhostingaccount.com ([83.161.120.155] helo=mailscan17.yourhostingaccount.com) by mailout07.yourhostingaccount.com with esmtp (Exim) id 1PNpjt-0001lw-M0 for kwhite@example.com; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 11:41:05 -0500 Received: from impout02.yourhostingaccount.com ([83.161.120.155] helo=impout02.yourhostingaccount.com) by mailscan17.yourhostingaccount.com with esmtp (Exim) id 1PNpjt-0002IY-5u; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 11:41:05 -0500 Received: from authsmtp11.yourhostingaccount.com ([83.161.120.155]) by impout02.yourhostingaccount.com with NO UCE id dsh51f00A0EKrUA0000000; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 11:41:05 -0500 X-EN-OrigOutIP: 83.161.120.155 X-EN-IMPSID: dsh51f00A0EKrUA0000000 Received: from ip70-189-103-32.ok.ok.cox.net ([83.161.120.155] helo=[83.161.120.155]) by authsmtp11.yourhostingaccount.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim) id 1PNpjs-0007Jk-Gp; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 11:41:04 -0500 Message-ID: <kwhite@example.com> Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2010 10:40:59 -0600 From: Gregg Wonderly <kwhite@example.com> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:83.161.120.155) Gecko/20101027 Thunderbird/3.1.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: kwhite@example.com CC: Patricia Shanahan <kwhite@example.com> Subject: Re: QA speed improvement References: <kwhite@example.com> <kwhite@example.com> <kwhite@example.com> <kwhite@example.com> <kwhite@example.com> <kwhite@example.com> <kwhite@example.com> <kwhite@example.com> <kwhite@example.com> In-Reply-To: <kwhite@example.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-EN-UserInfo: 5bac21c6012e8295aaee92c67842fba3:d1e94006e19829b2b3cf849ab9ff0f3c X-EN-AuthUser: greggwon Sender: Gregg Wonderly <kwhite@example.com> X-EN-OrigIP: 83.161.120.155 X-EN-OrigHost: ip70-189-103-32.ok.ok.cox.net X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On 11/26/2010 10:32 PM, Patricia Shanahan wrote: > Patricia Shanahan wrote: >> Sim IJskes - QCG wrote: >>> On 26-11-10 15:21, Patricia Shanahan wrote: >>>>> What worries me a little is the state the operating system keeps on >>>>> terminated processes. We know of the SO_REUSEADDR issue, but you seem >>>>> to experience the non-release of resources on process termination. >>>>> formally a OS bug, but if so is something we need to workaround. How >>>>> definate are you on your reports where you have problems rerunning a >>>>> test caused by the OS not releasing resources on VM exit? >>>> >>>> I see two issues here: >>>> >>>> 1. Terminating every VM. >>> >>> A working termination is a firm requirement before bypassing orderly teardown >>> can be attempted. >>> >>>> 2. Deleting any temporary files. >> >> I think this comes down to making sure that if we create any files they >> are marked deleteOnExit, reducing the problem to terminating every VM. >> >>>> >>>> Empirically, a Ctrl-C termination often leaves the system in a state in >>>> which subsequent tests fail. >>> >>> Any idea which VM receives this Ctrl-C? The ant VM, the harness master, or >>> any random process? There is no such concept as process group leader under >>> windows is there? >> >> I'm sure the shell initially delivers the signal to the ant job that I >> told it to run. I have no idea how and to what extent it gets passed on >> to the various processes that are created e.g. to run services. It's a >> good question, and I'll think a bit about how to find out. > > I've thought of two schemes, and some reasons why we may want to implement both. > > Scheme 1: Modify each class that calls Runtime.getRuntime.exec to register a > shutdownHook to destroy the Process that exec returned. > > This has a window between the exec call and the addShutdownHook call during > which termination of the VM doing the process creation would leave the process > as an orphan, with no arrangement to destroy it. > > Scheme 2: Require each public static void main(String[]) method in River to log > the pid of its process in a log message with a specific format. Write a program > that scans the log file for those messages, and kills each process. > > This is reliable, in the sense that a thread can be required to write to the log > before doing anything that reserves a resource. It is not so good for normal > shutdown, because it requires log reading. > > I think Scheme 1 would work well for normal termination. By the time the test > finishes, all the windows between creating a process and creating the shutdown > hook to kill it will have closed. Scheme 2 would be useful as a backup in the > event of a crash or cntrl-C while processes are being created. Knowing the PID > of each River process in a configuration could be useful to admins running > production systems, as well as in our QA environment. > > Any other ideas? I believe that in UNIX, #1 is already taken care of for interactive sessions through the propagation of SIGINT to all child processes by the kernel. But, as I said before, Runtime.addShutdownHook() would be a much more reliable way to manage the shutdown process. Adding one shutdown thread per background task would not be advisable. Instead, we'd need to track the "background threads" in a Collection, and have one shutdown hook that inspected that collection and did the appropriate thing. Creating the "test" processes from a single "process" that used such a mechanism would allow for a more dependable startup and shutdown. In that case, one thread per background process would be appropriate because we could then use parallel threads (2x the number of processes) to Thread.join() the shutdown hook threads, and report when they were shutdown etc. Gregg From river-dev-returnkwhite@example.com Wed Dec 01 17:29:33 2010 Return-Path: <river-dev-returnkwhite@example.com> Delivered-To: kwhite@example.com Received: (qmail 13351 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2010 17:29:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 1 Dec 2010 17:29:33 -0000 Received: (qmail 35483 invoked by uid 500); 1 Dec 2010 17:29:33 -0000 Delivered-To: kwhite@example.com Received: (qmail 35445 invoked by uid 500); 1 Dec 2010 17:29:32 -0000 Mailing-List: contact kwhite@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:kwhite@example.com> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:kwhite@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:kwhite@example.com> List-Id: <river-dev.incubator.apache.org> Reply-To: kwhite@example.com Delivered-To: mailing list kwhite@example.com Received: (qmail 35437 invoked by uid 99); 1 Dec 2010 17:29:32 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 17:29:32 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of kwhite@example.com designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO elasmtp-kukur.atl.sa.earthlink.net) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 17:29:25 +0000 Received: from [83.161.120.155] (helo=[83.161.120.155]) by elasmtp-kukur.atl.sa.earthlink.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from <kwhite@example.com>) id 1PNqUK-0001eK-6U for kwhite@example.com; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 12:29:04 -0500 Message-ID: <kwhite@example.com> Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2010 09:28:58 -0800 From: Patricia Shanahan <kwhite@example.com> User-Agent: Thunderbird 83.161.120.155 (Windows/20100228) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: kwhite@example.com Subject: Re: JVM version policy Was: Re: Build failed in Hudson: River-trunk-jdk1.5 #3 References: <862502422.8331290517859184.JavaMail.hudson@aegis> <112459958.8391290520715806.JavaMail.hudson@aegis> <kwhite@example.com> <kwhite@example.com> <kwhite@example.com> <kwhite@example.com> <kwhite@example.com> <kwhite@example.com> <kwhite@example.com> <kwhite@example.com> <kwhite@example.com> <kwhite@example.com> In-Reply-To: <kwhite@example.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-ELNK-Trace: 9a090983a806273c061ba25959e76cc985338a7d01cb3b6a7e972de0d01da940ed51807a4d0f168ed4add4f43848b676350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 83.161.120.155 I have a constant tension between two ways of thinking. As a programmer, looking only at the best way to fix bugs and make the software faster and more reliable, I sorely miss JDK 1.5 and 1.6 features, especially java.util.concurrent etc., which makes concurrent programming much cleaner. On the other hand, I've interacted with people managing large networks, and software developers who distribute their products to organizations with large networks. Those two audiences tend to be extremely conservative. Supporting an infrastructure software release is a big deal, with enormous testing costs. Moving to a new release, especially if it has to be done simultaneously on multiple systems, is a major project, with months of
{'source': 'Apache Software Foundation Public Mail Archives'}