[VOTE][RC2] Commons collections 4.3

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
71 messages Options
1234
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE][RC2] Commons collections 4.3

sebb-2-2
On Fri, 4 Jan 2019 at 11:55, Gilles <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> hi.
>
> On Thu, 3 Jan 2019 22:04:24 +0530, Amey Jadiye wrote:
> > Hello Maxim / All
> >
> > I put little more efforts to find out the possible cause of the
> > error.
> > In the clirr code, I found the reason for this error and same is
> > documented
> > in clirr documentation [1].
> >
> > A method declaration has been added to the specified interface. This
> > is
> > always reported as a binary-compatibility error, but in practice, the
> > changed class might be used successfully with code compiled against
> > the old
> > interface depending upon usage patterns.
> >
> > Old code which invokes methods upon code compiled against the new
> > (expanded) interface will continue to work without issues. And old
> > code
> > which implements the old version of the interface will also continue
> > to
> > work correctly as long as no code attempts to invoke any of the
> > newly-added
> > methods against that instance. But the code which (validly) invokes
> > one of
> > the new methods in the interface against an object which implements
> > only
> > the old version of the interface will cause an AbstractMethodError to
> > be
> > thrown at the time the method invocation is attempted.
>
> IIUC, new code that calls the new methods on [Collections] classes
> will crash.  Does not look good.

If that is the case.
I'm not convinced - I think we need to test that assertion.

> On the other hand, Maxim wrote earlier that a method reported by
> Clirr as "new" (cf. below) was in fact present since Java 6...
>
> Are we then sure that it's a Clirr bug?
> If so, why did you not vote "+1" (on the condition that the false
> positive is mentioned in the release notes)?

Note also that Maven Clirr does not distinguish between source and
binary incompatibility.
(I think Clirr does, but this is not shown in the generated report).

> We could also make some definite progress with an actual code
> example that calls the incriminated methods, compiled against the
> current version of the library and then run against the current RC,
> and see whether it crashes.

+1

That would prove whether the assumptions are correct or not.

> Alternatively, we could instate "revapi" in the POM (and disable
> Clirr); and if the report is clean, trust that (though "revapi" is
> still beta).
>
> Opinions?
>
> Gilles
>
> >
> > In 4.2 and 4.3 looks like we have upgraded the java version[2] where
> > for
> > example for Map interface might have added a few more methods causing
> > these
> > errors.
> >
> > For this release, I am voting 0 (Non-Binding) as there is unharmed
> > mess
> > around the clirr.
> >
> > rest of the things are OK with this release, I would encourage to
> > have
> > revapi replacing clirr.
> >
> >
> > [1]  http://clirr.sourceforge.net/clirr-core/exegesis.html
> > [2]
> >
> > https://github.com/apache/commons-collections/commit/482762a13f739631f94d03642b0a55a9b7214c44
> >
> > Regards,
> > Amey
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 3, 2019 at 11:53 AM Amey Jadiye <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> I spared little time on finding issue however didn't found it in
> >> clirr(may
> >> be hidden somewhere),  today will check if clirr maven plugin have
> >> any
> >> issues. also I saw that few other apache commons modules having same
> >> issue
> >> and are released.
> >>
> >> I also gave try on revapi with commons collection4 4.3RC2.
> >> revapi:check
> >> was clean unlike clirr, looks promising to replace clirr.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Amey
> >>
> >> On Wed, 2 Jan 2019, 12:31 pm Maxim Solodovnik <[hidden email]
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hello All,
> >>>
> >>> Just checked clirr report one more time
> >>> This time I took 1 error and perform investigation:
> >>>
> >>> "Method 'public java.util.Collection values()' has been added to an
> >>> interface" org.apache.commons.collections4.BidiMap
> >>>
> >>> In fact I don't understand why this error was reported
> >>> BidiMap extends java.util.Map
> >>> Map has method "public java.util.Collection values()" in all
> >>> versions:
> >>> https://docs.oracle.com/javase/6/docs/api/java/util/Map.html
> >>> https://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/api/java/util/Map.html
> >>> https://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/api/java/util/Map.html
> >>>
> >>> Maybe its clirr issue?
> >>> Would appreciate any help with this investigation
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, 31 Dec 2018 at 16:53, Gilles <[hidden email]>
> >>> wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> > On Mon, 31 Dec 2018 07:41:40 +0700, Maxim Solodovnik wrote:
> >>> > > Hello Gilles,
> >>> > >
> >>> > > I already did analysis: [1], all errors are caused by previous
> >>> > > release
> >>> > > 4.3 doesn't introduce any new errors ...
> >>> > >
> >>> > > [1] https://markmail.org/message/l7ftxlvdk4yqxijt
> >>> >
> >>> > I had seen the post but it says:
> >>> > ---
> >>> > these errors are weird. Above classes has no changes comparing to
> >>> 4.2
> >>> > ---
> >>> >
> >>> > But IMHO it was not a conclusion: If the cause of the errors was
> >>> > identified, it could have been mentioned in the release notes
> >>> > and/or the [VOTE] email, in order to avoid further questioning.
> >>> >
> >>> > Is the cause the change of supported JDK?
> >>> >
> >>> > Regards,
> >>> > Gilles
> >>> >
> >>> > >
> >>> > > On Mon, 31 Dec 2018 at 07:26, Rob Tompkins <[hidden email]>
> >>> > > wrote:
> >>> > >>
> >>> > >> I’ll give it a look tonight or in the morning.
> >>> > >>
> >>> > >> -Rob
> >>> > >>
> >>> > >> > On Dec 30, 2018, at 12:25 AM, Maxim Solodovnik
> >>> > >> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>> > >> >
> >>> > >> > No votes after 3 days :(
> >>> > >> > Is there anything wrong with the RC?
> >>> > >> >
> >>> > >> >> On Thu, 27 Dec 2018 at 05:20, Bruno P. Kinoshita
> >>> > >> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>> > >> >>
> >>> > >> >> FWIW I had a similar experience, and realized I was doing
> >>> `git
> >>> > >> fetch --all`, but it didn't bring the tags. `git fetch --tags`
> >>> did
> >>> the
> >>> > >> trick. After that I could `git checkout $tag-name`
> >>> > >> >>
> >>> > >> >> Cheers
> >>> > >> >> Bruno
> >>> > >> >>
> >>> > >> >>
> >>> > >> >>
> >>> > >> >>
> >>> > >> >> ________________________________
> >>> > >> >> From: Gilles <[hidden email]>
> >>> > >> >> To: [hidden email]
> >>> > >> >> Sent: Thursday, 27 December 2018 9:26 AM
> >>> > >> >> Subject: Re: [VOTE][RC2] Commons collections 4.3
> >>> > >> >>
> >>> > >> >>
> >>> > >> >>
> >>> > >> >>> On Wed, 26 Dec 2018 21:21:34 +0100, Gilles wrote:
> >>> > >> >>> Hi.
> >>> > >> >>>
> >>> > >> >>>> On Wed, 26 Dec 2018 20:41:59 +0700, Maxim Solodovnik
> >>> wrote:
> >>> > >> >>>> This is a [VOTE] for releasing
> >>> > >> >>>> Apache Commons collections 4.3
> >>> > >> >>>>
> >>> > >> >>>> Tag name:
> >>> > >> >>>>    collections-4.3-RC2 (signature can be checked from git
> >>> using
> >>> > >> >>>> 'git
> >>> > >> >>>> tag -v')
> >>> > >> >>>
> >>> > >> >>> $ git tag -v collections-4.3-RC2
> >>> > >> >>> error: tag 'collections-4.3-RC2' not found.
> >>> > >> >>>
> >>> > >> >>> Although I see it in the link below...
> >>> > >> >>> What is going on?
> >>> > >> >>
> >>> > >> >> Issue vanished with a fresh "clone".
> >>> > >> >> [Sorry for the noise.]
> >>> > >> >>
> >>> > >> >>
> >>> > >> >>>> RC1 was cancelled due to some release steps were not done
> >>> > >> >>>>
> >>> > >> >>>> Tag URL:
> >>> > >> >>>>
> >>> > >> >>>>
> >>> > >> >>>>
> >>> > >>
> >>>
> >>> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=commons-collections.git;a=commit;h=77e37dbf238d26351edb29e95391e3df75095d01
> >>> > >> >>>>
> >>> > >> >>>> Commit ID the tag points at:
> >>> > >> >>>>    77e37dbf238d26351edb29e95391e3df75095d01
> >>> > >> >>>>
> >>> > >> >>>> Site:
> >>> > >> >>>>
> >>> > >> >>>>
> >>> > >> >>>>
> >>> > >>
> >>>
> >>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/4.3-RC2/site/index.html
> >>> > >> >>>
> >>> > >> >>> The Clirr report is still a problem:
> >>> > >> >>>
> >>> > >> >>>
> >>> > >> >>>
> >>> > >>
> >>>
> >>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/4.3-RC2/site/clirr-report.html
> >>> > >> >>>
> >>> > >> >>> [The same errors are reported on my machine, so it's
> >>> > >> >>> not a cache issue...]
> >>> > >> >>>
> >>> > >> >>> Regards,
> >>> > >> >>> Gilles
> >>> > >> >>>
> >>> > >> >>>>
> >>> > >> >>>> Distribution files (committed at revision 31689):
> >>> > >> >>>>
> >>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/
> >>> > >> >>>>
> >>> > >> >>>> Distribution files hashes (SHA256):
> >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-bin.tar.gz
> >>> > >> >>>>
> >>> > >>
> >>> 214c12fae27403f1a16ca6c108b5a8682be1a885a0dbbfc8eb30941303e1fe94
> >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-bin.zip
> >>> > >> >>>>
> >>> > >>
> >>> 75b51a98fea6fca3746a3f70c6a0be24c99849e4976c4649214eaa5a009d0aeb
> >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-src.tar.gz
> >>> > >> >>>>
> >>> > >>
> >>> 399f403feca86dbba7c4162eb90174db45979a2f7db2b3e0ba48240dc43ab434
> >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-src.zip
> >>> > >> >>>>
> >>> > >>
> >>> 1c637e260b5b9e372d196593c7617ad3adedb6da3ac9196d086f9fc24401f5c3
> >>> > >> >>>>
> >>> > >> >>>> KEYS file to check signatures:
> >>> > >> >>>>   https://www.apache.org/dist/commons/KEYS
> >>> > >> >>>>
> >>> > >> >>>> Maven artifacts:
> >>> > >> >>>>
> >>> > >> >>>>
> >>> > >>
> >>>
> >>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1405/
> >>> > >> >>>>
> >>> > >> >>>> Please select one of the following options:
> >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] +1 Release it.
> >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] +0 Go ahead; I don't care.
> >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] -0 There are a few minor glitches: ...
> >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] -1 No, do not release it because ...
> >>> > >> >>>>
> >>> > >> >>>> This vote will be open for at least 72 hours, i.e. until
> >>> > >> >>>> 2018-12-29T14:00:00Z
> >>> > >> >>>> (this is UTC time).
> >>> > >> >>>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE][RC2] Commons collections 4.3

Amey Jadiye
In reply to this post by Gilles Sadowski
On Fri, 4 Jan 2019, 5:25 pm Gilles <[hidden email] wrote:

> hi.
>
Hi Gilles,

>
> On Thu, 3 Jan 2019 22:04:24 +0530, Amey Jadiye wrote:
> > Hello Maxim / All
> >
> > I put little more efforts to find out the possible cause of the
> > error.
> > In the clirr code, I found the reason for this error and same is
> > documented
> > in clirr documentation [1].
> >
> > A method declaration has been added to the specified interface. This
> > is
> > always reported as a binary-compatibility error, but in practice, the
> > changed class might be used successfully with code compiled against
> > the old
> > interface depending upon usage patterns.
> >
> > Old code which invokes methods upon code compiled against the new
> > (expanded) interface will continue to work without issues. And old
> > code
> > which implements the old version of the interface will also continue
> > to
> > work correctly as long as no code attempts to invoke any of the
> > newly-added
> > methods against that instance. But the code which (validly) invokes
> > one of
> > the new methods in the interface against an object which implements
> > only
> > the old version of the interface will cause an AbstractMethodError to
> > be
> > thrown at the time the method invocation is attempted.
>
> IIUC, new code that calls the new methods on [Collections] classes
> will crash.  Does not look good.
> On the other hand, Maxim wrote earlier that a method reported by
> Clirr as "new" (cf. below) was in fact present since Java 6...
>
> Are we then sure that it's a Clirr bug?
> If so, why did you not vote "+1" (on the condition that the false
> positive is mentioned in the release notes)?
>
> We could also make some definite progress with an actual code
> example that calls the incriminated methods, compiled against the
> current version of the library and then run against the current RC,
> and see whether it crashes.
>

Thanks for directions here, I must also check that. Till then I would like
to change my vote to -1 (Non Binding) for this release.


> Alternatively, we could instate "revapi" in the POM (and disable
> Clirr); and if the report is clean, trust that (though "revapi" is
> still beta).
>
> Opinions?
>
> Gilles
>
> >
> > In 4.2 and 4.3 looks like we have upgraded the java version[2] where
> > for
> > example for Map interface might have added a few more methods causing
> > these
> > errors.
> >
> > For this release, I am voting 0 (Non-Binding) as there is unharmed
> > mess
> > around the clirr.
> >
> > rest of the things are OK with this release, I would encourage to
> > have
> > revapi replacing clirr.
> >
> >
> > [1]  http://clirr.sourceforge.net/clirr-core/exegesis.html
> > [2]
> >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/commons-collections/commit/482762a13f739631f94d03642b0a55a9b7214c44
> >
> > Regards,
> > Amey
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 3, 2019 at 11:53 AM Amey Jadiye <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> I spared little time on finding issue however didn't found it in
> >> clirr(may
> >> be hidden somewhere),  today will check if clirr maven plugin have
> >> any
> >> issues. also I saw that few other apache commons modules having same
> >> issue
> >> and are released.
> >>
> >> I also gave try on revapi with commons collection4 4.3RC2.
> >> revapi:check
> >> was clean unlike clirr, looks promising to replace clirr.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Amey
> >>
> >> On Wed, 2 Jan 2019, 12:31 pm Maxim Solodovnik <[hidden email]
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hello All,
> >>>
> >>> Just checked clirr report one more time
> >>> This time I took 1 error and perform investigation:
> >>>
> >>> "Method 'public java.util.Collection values()' has been added to an
> >>> interface" org.apache.commons.collections4.BidiMap
> >>>
> >>> In fact I don't understand why this error was reported
> >>> BidiMap extends java.util.Map
> >>> Map has method "public java.util.Collection values()" in all
> >>> versions:
> >>> https://docs.oracle.com/javase/6/docs/api/java/util/Map.html
> >>> https://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/api/java/util/Map.html
> >>> https://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/api/java/util/Map.html
> >>>
> >>> Maybe its clirr issue?
> >>> Would appreciate any help with this investigation
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, 31 Dec 2018 at 16:53, Gilles <[hidden email]>
> >>> wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> > On Mon, 31 Dec 2018 07:41:40 +0700, Maxim Solodovnik wrote:
> >>> > > Hello Gilles,
> >>> > >
> >>> > > I already did analysis: [1], all errors are caused by previous
> >>> > > release
> >>> > > 4.3 doesn't introduce any new errors ...
> >>> > >
> >>> > > [1] https://markmail.org/message/l7ftxlvdk4yqxijt
> >>> >
> >>> > I had seen the post but it says:
> >>> > ---
> >>> > these errors are weird. Above classes has no changes comparing to
> >>> 4.2
> >>> > ---
> >>> >
> >>> > But IMHO it was not a conclusion: If the cause of the errors was
> >>> > identified, it could have been mentioned in the release notes
> >>> > and/or the [VOTE] email, in order to avoid further questioning.
> >>> >
> >>> > Is the cause the change of supported JDK?
> >>> >
> >>> > Regards,
> >>> > Gilles
> >>> >
> >>> > >
> >>> > > On Mon, 31 Dec 2018 at 07:26, Rob Tompkins <[hidden email]>
> >>> > > wrote:
> >>> > >>
> >>> > >> I’ll give it a look tonight or in the morning.
> >>> > >>
> >>> > >> -Rob
> >>> > >>
> >>> > >> > On Dec 30, 2018, at 12:25 AM, Maxim Solodovnik
> >>> > >> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>> > >> >
> >>> > >> > No votes after 3 days :(
> >>> > >> > Is there anything wrong with the RC?
> >>> > >> >
> >>> > >> >> On Thu, 27 Dec 2018 at 05:20, Bruno P. Kinoshita
> >>> > >> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>> > >> >>
> >>> > >> >> FWIW I had a similar experience, and realized I was doing
> >>> `git
> >>> > >> fetch --all`, but it didn't bring the tags. `git fetch --tags`
> >>> did
> >>> the
> >>> > >> trick. After that I could `git checkout $tag-name`
> >>> > >> >>
> >>> > >> >> Cheers
> >>> > >> >> Bruno
> >>> > >> >>
> >>> > >> >>
> >>> > >> >>
> >>> > >> >>
> >>> > >> >> ________________________________
> >>> > >> >> From: Gilles <[hidden email]>
> >>> > >> >> To: [hidden email]
> >>> > >> >> Sent: Thursday, 27 December 2018 9:26 AM
> >>> > >> >> Subject: Re: [VOTE][RC2] Commons collections 4.3
> >>> > >> >>
> >>> > >> >>
> >>> > >> >>
> >>> > >> >>> On Wed, 26 Dec 2018 21:21:34 +0100, Gilles wrote:
> >>> > >> >>> Hi.
> >>> > >> >>>
> >>> > >> >>>> On Wed, 26 Dec 2018 20:41:59 +0700, Maxim Solodovnik
> >>> wrote:
> >>> > >> >>>> This is a [VOTE] for releasing
> >>> > >> >>>> Apache Commons collections 4.3
> >>> > >> >>>>
> >>> > >> >>>> Tag name:
> >>> > >> >>>>    collections-4.3-RC2 (signature can be checked from git
> >>> using
> >>> > >> >>>> 'git
> >>> > >> >>>> tag -v')
> >>> > >> >>>
> >>> > >> >>> $ git tag -v collections-4.3-RC2
> >>> > >> >>> error: tag 'collections-4.3-RC2' not found.
> >>> > >> >>>
> >>> > >> >>> Although I see it in the link below...
> >>> > >> >>> What is going on?
> >>> > >> >>
> >>> > >> >> Issue vanished with a fresh "clone".
> >>> > >> >> [Sorry for the noise.]
> >>> > >> >>
> >>> > >> >>
> >>> > >> >>>> RC1 was cancelled due to some release steps were not done
> >>> > >> >>>>
> >>> > >> >>>> Tag URL:
> >>> > >> >>>>
> >>> > >> >>>>
> >>> > >> >>>>
> >>> > >>
> >>>
> >>>
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=commons-collections.git;a=commit;h=77e37dbf238d26351edb29e95391e3df75095d01
> >>> > >> >>>>
> >>> > >> >>>> Commit ID the tag points at:
> >>> > >> >>>>    77e37dbf238d26351edb29e95391e3df75095d01
> >>> > >> >>>>
> >>> > >> >>>> Site:
> >>> > >> >>>>
> >>> > >> >>>>
> >>> > >> >>>>
> >>> > >>
> >>>
> >>>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/4.3-RC2/site/index.html
> >>> > >> >>>
> >>> > >> >>> The Clirr report is still a problem:
> >>> > >> >>>
> >>> > >> >>>
> >>> > >> >>>
> >>> > >>
> >>>
> >>>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/4.3-RC2/site/clirr-report.html
> >>> > >> >>>
> >>> > >> >>> [The same errors are reported on my machine, so it's
> >>> > >> >>> not a cache issue...]
> >>> > >> >>>
> >>> > >> >>> Regards,
> >>> > >> >>> Gilles
> >>> > >> >>>
> >>> > >> >>>>
> >>> > >> >>>> Distribution files (committed at revision 31689):
> >>> > >> >>>>
> >>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/
> >>> > >> >>>>
> >>> > >> >>>> Distribution files hashes (SHA256):
> >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-bin.tar.gz
> >>> > >> >>>>
> >>> > >>
> >>> 214c12fae27403f1a16ca6c108b5a8682be1a885a0dbbfc8eb30941303e1fe94
> >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-bin.zip
> >>> > >> >>>>
> >>> > >>
> >>> 75b51a98fea6fca3746a3f70c6a0be24c99849e4976c4649214eaa5a009d0aeb
> >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-src.tar.gz
> >>> > >> >>>>
> >>> > >>
> >>> 399f403feca86dbba7c4162eb90174db45979a2f7db2b3e0ba48240dc43ab434
> >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-src.zip
> >>> > >> >>>>
> >>> > >>
> >>> 1c637e260b5b9e372d196593c7617ad3adedb6da3ac9196d086f9fc24401f5c3
> >>> > >> >>>>
> >>> > >> >>>> KEYS file to check signatures:
> >>> > >> >>>>   https://www.apache.org/dist/commons/KEYS
> >>> > >> >>>>
> >>> > >> >>>> Maven artifacts:
> >>> > >> >>>>
> >>> > >> >>>>
> >>> > >>
> >>>
> >>>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1405/
> >>> > >> >>>>
> >>> > >> >>>> Please select one of the following options:
> >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] +1 Release it.
> >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] +0 Go ahead; I don't care.
> >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] -0 There are a few minor glitches: ...
> >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] -1 No, do not release it because ...
> >>> > >> >>>>
> >>> > >> >>>> This vote will be open for at least 72 hours, i.e. until
> >>> > >> >>>> 2018-12-29T14:00:00Z
> >>> > >> >>>> (this is UTC time).
> >>> > >> >>>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE][RC2] Commons collections 4.3

Maxim Solodovnik
Hello All,

Shall I cancel this VOTE and change project coordinates to be
commons-collections5 ?

On Sat, 5 Jan 2019 at 01:04, Amey Jadiye <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Fri, 4 Jan 2019, 5:25 pm Gilles <[hidden email] wrote:
>
> > hi.
> >
> Hi Gilles,
>
> >
> > On Thu, 3 Jan 2019 22:04:24 +0530, Amey Jadiye wrote:
> > > Hello Maxim / All
> > >
> > > I put little more efforts to find out the possible cause of the
> > > error.
> > > In the clirr code, I found the reason for this error and same is
> > > documented
> > > in clirr documentation [1].
> > >
> > > A method declaration has been added to the specified interface. This
> > > is
> > > always reported as a binary-compatibility error, but in practice, the
> > > changed class might be used successfully with code compiled against
> > > the old
> > > interface depending upon usage patterns.
> > >
> > > Old code which invokes methods upon code compiled against the new
> > > (expanded) interface will continue to work without issues. And old
> > > code
> > > which implements the old version of the interface will also continue
> > > to
> > > work correctly as long as no code attempts to invoke any of the
> > > newly-added
> > > methods against that instance. But the code which (validly) invokes
> > > one of
> > > the new methods in the interface against an object which implements
> > > only
> > > the old version of the interface will cause an AbstractMethodError to
> > > be
> > > thrown at the time the method invocation is attempted.
> >
> > IIUC, new code that calls the new methods on [Collections] classes
> > will crash.  Does not look good.
> > On the other hand, Maxim wrote earlier that a method reported by
> > Clirr as "new" (cf. below) was in fact present since Java 6...
> >
> > Are we then sure that it's a Clirr bug?
> > If so, why did you not vote "+1" (on the condition that the false
> > positive is mentioned in the release notes)?
> >
> > We could also make some definite progress with an actual code
> > example that calls the incriminated methods, compiled against the
> > current version of the library and then run against the current RC,
> > and see whether it crashes.
> >
>
> Thanks for directions here, I must also check that. Till then I would like
> to change my vote to -1 (Non Binding) for this release.
>
>
> > Alternatively, we could instate "revapi" in the POM (and disable
> > Clirr); and if the report is clean, trust that (though "revapi" is
> > still beta).
> >
> > Opinions?
> >
> > Gilles
> >
> > >
> > > In 4.2 and 4.3 looks like we have upgraded the java version[2] where
> > > for
> > > example for Map interface might have added a few more methods causing
> > > these
> > > errors.
> > >
> > > For this release, I am voting 0 (Non-Binding) as there is unharmed
> > > mess
> > > around the clirr.
> > >
> > > rest of the things are OK with this release, I would encourage to
> > > have
> > > revapi replacing clirr.
> > >
> > >
> > > [1]  http://clirr.sourceforge.net/clirr-core/exegesis.html
> > > [2]
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/commons-collections/commit/482762a13f739631f94d03642b0a55a9b7214c44
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Amey
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jan 3, 2019 at 11:53 AM Amey Jadiye <[hidden email]>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> I spared little time on finding issue however didn't found it in
> > >> clirr(may
> > >> be hidden somewhere),  today will check if clirr maven plugin have
> > >> any
> > >> issues. also I saw that few other apache commons modules having same
> > >> issue
> > >> and are released.
> > >>
> > >> I also gave try on revapi with commons collection4 4.3RC2.
> > >> revapi:check
> > >> was clean unlike clirr, looks promising to replace clirr.
> > >>
> > >> Regards,
> > >> Amey
> > >>
> > >> On Wed, 2 Jan 2019, 12:31 pm Maxim Solodovnik <[hidden email]
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Hello All,
> > >>>
> > >>> Just checked clirr report one more time
> > >>> This time I took 1 error and perform investigation:
> > >>>
> > >>> "Method 'public java.util.Collection values()' has been added to an
> > >>> interface" org.apache.commons.collections4.BidiMap
> > >>>
> > >>> In fact I don't understand why this error was reported
> > >>> BidiMap extends java.util.Map
> > >>> Map has method "public java.util.Collection values()" in all
> > >>> versions:
> > >>> https://docs.oracle.com/javase/6/docs/api/java/util/Map.html
> > >>> https://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/api/java/util/Map.html
> > >>> https://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/api/java/util/Map.html
> > >>>
> > >>> Maybe its clirr issue?
> > >>> Would appreciate any help with this investigation
> > >>>
> > >>> On Mon, 31 Dec 2018 at 16:53, Gilles <[hidden email]>
> > >>> wrote:
> > >>> >
> > >>> > On Mon, 31 Dec 2018 07:41:40 +0700, Maxim Solodovnik wrote:
> > >>> > > Hello Gilles,
> > >>> > >
> > >>> > > I already did analysis: [1], all errors are caused by previous
> > >>> > > release
> > >>> > > 4.3 doesn't introduce any new errors ...
> > >>> > >
> > >>> > > [1] https://markmail.org/message/l7ftxlvdk4yqxijt
> > >>> >
> > >>> > I had seen the post but it says:
> > >>> > ---
> > >>> > these errors are weird. Above classes has no changes comparing to
> > >>> 4.2
> > >>> > ---
> > >>> >
> > >>> > But IMHO it was not a conclusion: If the cause of the errors was
> > >>> > identified, it could have been mentioned in the release notes
> > >>> > and/or the [VOTE] email, in order to avoid further questioning.
> > >>> >
> > >>> > Is the cause the change of supported JDK?
> > >>> >
> > >>> > Regards,
> > >>> > Gilles
> > >>> >
> > >>> > >
> > >>> > > On Mon, 31 Dec 2018 at 07:26, Rob Tompkins <[hidden email]>
> > >>> > > wrote:
> > >>> > >>
> > >>> > >> I’ll give it a look tonight or in the morning.
> > >>> > >>
> > >>> > >> -Rob
> > >>> > >>
> > >>> > >> > On Dec 30, 2018, at 12:25 AM, Maxim Solodovnik
> > >>> > >> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >>> > >> >
> > >>> > >> > No votes after 3 days :(
> > >>> > >> > Is there anything wrong with the RC?
> > >>> > >> >
> > >>> > >> >> On Thu, 27 Dec 2018 at 05:20, Bruno P. Kinoshita
> > >>> > >> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >>> > >> >>
> > >>> > >> >> FWIW I had a similar experience, and realized I was doing
> > >>> `git
> > >>> > >> fetch --all`, but it didn't bring the tags. `git fetch --tags`
> > >>> did
> > >>> the
> > >>> > >> trick. After that I could `git checkout $tag-name`
> > >>> > >> >>
> > >>> > >> >> Cheers
> > >>> > >> >> Bruno
> > >>> > >> >>
> > >>> > >> >>
> > >>> > >> >>
> > >>> > >> >>
> > >>> > >> >> ________________________________
> > >>> > >> >> From: Gilles <[hidden email]>
> > >>> > >> >> To: [hidden email]
> > >>> > >> >> Sent: Thursday, 27 December 2018 9:26 AM
> > >>> > >> >> Subject: Re: [VOTE][RC2] Commons collections 4.3
> > >>> > >> >>
> > >>> > >> >>
> > >>> > >> >>
> > >>> > >> >>> On Wed, 26 Dec 2018 21:21:34 +0100, Gilles wrote:
> > >>> > >> >>> Hi.
> > >>> > >> >>>
> > >>> > >> >>>> On Wed, 26 Dec 2018 20:41:59 +0700, Maxim Solodovnik
> > >>> wrote:
> > >>> > >> >>>> This is a [VOTE] for releasing
> > >>> > >> >>>> Apache Commons collections 4.3
> > >>> > >> >>>>
> > >>> > >> >>>> Tag name:
> > >>> > >> >>>>    collections-4.3-RC2 (signature can be checked from git
> > >>> using
> > >>> > >> >>>> 'git
> > >>> > >> >>>> tag -v')
> > >>> > >> >>>
> > >>> > >> >>> $ git tag -v collections-4.3-RC2
> > >>> > >> >>> error: tag 'collections-4.3-RC2' not found.
> > >>> > >> >>>
> > >>> > >> >>> Although I see it in the link below...
> > >>> > >> >>> What is going on?
> > >>> > >> >>
> > >>> > >> >> Issue vanished with a fresh "clone".
> > >>> > >> >> [Sorry for the noise.]
> > >>> > >> >>
> > >>> > >> >>
> > >>> > >> >>>> RC1 was cancelled due to some release steps were not done
> > >>> > >> >>>>
> > >>> > >> >>>> Tag URL:
> > >>> > >> >>>>
> > >>> > >> >>>>
> > >>> > >> >>>>
> > >>> > >>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> >
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=commons-collections.git;a=commit;h=77e37dbf238d26351edb29e95391e3df75095d01
> > >>> > >> >>>>
> > >>> > >> >>>> Commit ID the tag points at:
> > >>> > >> >>>>    77e37dbf238d26351edb29e95391e3df75095d01
> > >>> > >> >>>>
> > >>> > >> >>>> Site:
> > >>> > >> >>>>
> > >>> > >> >>>>
> > >>> > >> >>>>
> > >>> > >>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> >
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/4.3-RC2/site/index.html
> > >>> > >> >>>
> > >>> > >> >>> The Clirr report is still a problem:
> > >>> > >> >>>
> > >>> > >> >>>
> > >>> > >> >>>
> > >>> > >>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> >
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/4.3-RC2/site/clirr-report.html
> > >>> > >> >>>
> > >>> > >> >>> [The same errors are reported on my machine, so it's
> > >>> > >> >>> not a cache issue...]
> > >>> > >> >>>
> > >>> > >> >>> Regards,
> > >>> > >> >>> Gilles
> > >>> > >> >>>
> > >>> > >> >>>>
> > >>> > >> >>>> Distribution files (committed at revision 31689):
> > >>> > >> >>>>
> > >>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/
> > >>> > >> >>>>
> > >>> > >> >>>> Distribution files hashes (SHA256):
> > >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-bin.tar.gz
> > >>> > >> >>>>
> > >>> > >>
> > >>> 214c12fae27403f1a16ca6c108b5a8682be1a885a0dbbfc8eb30941303e1fe94
> > >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-bin.zip
> > >>> > >> >>>>
> > >>> > >>
> > >>> 75b51a98fea6fca3746a3f70c6a0be24c99849e4976c4649214eaa5a009d0aeb
> > >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-src.tar.gz
> > >>> > >> >>>>
> > >>> > >>
> > >>> 399f403feca86dbba7c4162eb90174db45979a2f7db2b3e0ba48240dc43ab434
> > >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-src.zip
> > >>> > >> >>>>
> > >>> > >>
> > >>> 1c637e260b5b9e372d196593c7617ad3adedb6da3ac9196d086f9fc24401f5c3
> > >>> > >> >>>>
> > >>> > >> >>>> KEYS file to check signatures:
> > >>> > >> >>>>   https://www.apache.org/dist/commons/KEYS
> > >>> > >> >>>>
> > >>> > >> >>>> Maven artifacts:
> > >>> > >> >>>>
> > >>> > >> >>>>
> > >>> > >>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1405/
> > >>> > >> >>>>
> > >>> > >> >>>> Please select one of the following options:
> > >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] +1 Release it.
> > >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] +0 Go ahead; I don't care.
> > >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] -0 There are a few minor glitches: ...
> > >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] -1 No, do not release it because ...
> > >>> > >> >>>>
> > >>> > >> >>>> This vote will be open for at least 72 hours, i.e. until
> > >>> > >> >>>> 2018-12-29T14:00:00Z
> > >>> > >> >>>> (this is UTC time).
> > >>> > >> >>>>
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >
> >
>


--
WBR
Maxim aka solomax
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE][RC2] Commons collections 4.3

Gilles Sadowski-2
Hello.

Le jeu. 17 janv. 2019 à 04:24, Maxim Solodovnik <[hidden email]> a écrit :
>
> Hello All,
>
> Shall I cancel this VOTE and change project coordinates to be
> commons-collections5 ?

I must have missed part of the thread...  IMO, a major release is not
the answer to a possible false positive.
Did you make the actual test (mentioned somewhere below)?

Best regards,
Gilles

>
> On Sat, 5 Jan 2019 at 01:04, Amey Jadiye <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 4 Jan 2019, 5:25 pm Gilles <[hidden email] wrote:
> >
> > > hi.
> > >
> > Hi Gilles,
> >
> > >
> > > On Thu, 3 Jan 2019 22:04:24 +0530, Amey Jadiye wrote:
> > > > Hello Maxim / All
> > > >
> > > > I put little more efforts to find out the possible cause of the
> > > > error.
> > > > In the clirr code, I found the reason for this error and same is
> > > > documented
> > > > in clirr documentation [1].
> > > >
> > > > A method declaration has been added to the specified interface. This
> > > > is
> > > > always reported as a binary-compatibility error, but in practice, the
> > > > changed class might be used successfully with code compiled against
> > > > the old
> > > > interface depending upon usage patterns.
> > > >
> > > > Old code which invokes methods upon code compiled against the new
> > > > (expanded) interface will continue to work without issues. And old
> > > > code
> > > > which implements the old version of the interface will also continue
> > > > to
> > > > work correctly as long as no code attempts to invoke any of the
> > > > newly-added
> > > > methods against that instance. But the code which (validly) invokes
> > > > one of
> > > > the new methods in the interface against an object which implements
> > > > only
> > > > the old version of the interface will cause an AbstractMethodError to
> > > > be
> > > > thrown at the time the method invocation is attempted.
> > >
> > > IIUC, new code that calls the new methods on [Collections] classes
> > > will crash.  Does not look good.
> > > On the other hand, Maxim wrote earlier that a method reported by
> > > Clirr as "new" (cf. below) was in fact present since Java 6...
> > >
> > > Are we then sure that it's a Clirr bug?
> > > If so, why did you not vote "+1" (on the condition that the false
> > > positive is mentioned in the release notes)?
> > >
> > > We could also make some definite progress with an actual code
> > > example that calls the incriminated methods, compiled against the
> > > current version of the library and then run against the current RC,
> > > and see whether it crashes.
> > >
> >
> > Thanks for directions here, I must also check that. Till then I would like
> > to change my vote to -1 (Non Binding) for this release.
> >
> >
> > > Alternatively, we could instate "revapi" in the POM (and disable
> > > Clirr); and if the report is clean, trust that (though "revapi" is
> > > still beta).
> > >
> > > Opinions?
> > >
> > > Gilles
> > >
> > > >
> > > > In 4.2 and 4.3 looks like we have upgraded the java version[2] where
> > > > for
> > > > example for Map interface might have added a few more methods causing
> > > > these
> > > > errors.
> > > >
> > > > For this release, I am voting 0 (Non-Binding) as there is unharmed
> > > > mess
> > > > around the clirr.
> > > >
> > > > rest of the things are OK with this release, I would encourage to
> > > > have
> > > > revapi replacing clirr.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > [1]  http://clirr.sourceforge.net/clirr-core/exegesis.html
> > > > [2]
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > https://github.com/apache/commons-collections/commit/482762a13f739631f94d03642b0a55a9b7214c44
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Amey
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Jan 3, 2019 at 11:53 AM Amey Jadiye <[hidden email]>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> I spared little time on finding issue however didn't found it in
> > > >> clirr(may
> > > >> be hidden somewhere),  today will check if clirr maven plugin have
> > > >> any
> > > >> issues. also I saw that few other apache commons modules having same
> > > >> issue
> > > >> and are released.
> > > >>
> > > >> I also gave try on revapi with commons collection4 4.3RC2.
> > > >> revapi:check
> > > >> was clean unlike clirr, looks promising to replace clirr.
> > > >>
> > > >> Regards,
> > > >> Amey
> > > >>
> > > >> On Wed, 2 Jan 2019, 12:31 pm Maxim Solodovnik <[hidden email]
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> Hello All,
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Just checked clirr report one more time
> > > >>> This time I took 1 error and perform investigation:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> "Method 'public java.util.Collection values()' has been added to an
> > > >>> interface" org.apache.commons.collections4.BidiMap
> > > >>>
> > > >>> In fact I don't understand why this error was reported
> > > >>> BidiMap extends java.util.Map
> > > >>> Map has method "public java.util.Collection values()" in all
> > > >>> versions:
> > > >>> https://docs.oracle.com/javase/6/docs/api/java/util/Map.html
> > > >>> https://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/api/java/util/Map.html
> > > >>> https://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/api/java/util/Map.html
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Maybe its clirr issue?
> > > >>> Would appreciate any help with this investigation
> > > >>>
> > > >>> On Mon, 31 Dec 2018 at 16:53, Gilles <[hidden email]>
> > > >>> wrote:
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > On Mon, 31 Dec 2018 07:41:40 +0700, Maxim Solodovnik wrote:
> > > >>> > > Hello Gilles,
> > > >>> > >
> > > >>> > > I already did analysis: [1], all errors are caused by previous
> > > >>> > > release
> > > >>> > > 4.3 doesn't introduce any new errors ...
> > > >>> > >
> > > >>> > > [1] https://markmail.org/message/l7ftxlvdk4yqxijt
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > I had seen the post but it says:
> > > >>> > ---
> > > >>> > these errors are weird. Above classes has no changes comparing to
> > > >>> 4.2
> > > >>> > ---
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > But IMHO it was not a conclusion: If the cause of the errors was
> > > >>> > identified, it could have been mentioned in the release notes
> > > >>> > and/or the [VOTE] email, in order to avoid further questioning.
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > Is the cause the change of supported JDK?
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > Regards,
> > > >>> > Gilles
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > >
> > > >>> > > On Mon, 31 Dec 2018 at 07:26, Rob Tompkins <[hidden email]>
> > > >>> > > wrote:
> > > >>> > >>
> > > >>> > >> I’ll give it a look tonight or in the morning.
> > > >>> > >>
> > > >>> > >> -Rob
> > > >>> > >>
> > > >>> > >> > On Dec 30, 2018, at 12:25 AM, Maxim Solodovnik
> > > >>> > >> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > >>> > >> >
> > > >>> > >> > No votes after 3 days :(
> > > >>> > >> > Is there anything wrong with the RC?
> > > >>> > >> >
> > > >>> > >> >> On Thu, 27 Dec 2018 at 05:20, Bruno P. Kinoshita
> > > >>> > >> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > >>> > >> >>
> > > >>> > >> >> FWIW I had a similar experience, and realized I was doing
> > > >>> `git
> > > >>> > >> fetch --all`, but it didn't bring the tags. `git fetch --tags`
> > > >>> did
> > > >>> the
> > > >>> > >> trick. After that I could `git checkout $tag-name`
> > > >>> > >> >>
> > > >>> > >> >> Cheers
> > > >>> > >> >> Bruno
> > > >>> > >> >>
> > > >>> > >> >>
> > > >>> > >> >>
> > > >>> > >> >>
> > > >>> > >> >> ________________________________
> > > >>> > >> >> From: Gilles <[hidden email]>
> > > >>> > >> >> To: [hidden email]
> > > >>> > >> >> Sent: Thursday, 27 December 2018 9:26 AM
> > > >>> > >> >> Subject: Re: [VOTE][RC2] Commons collections 4.3
> > > >>> > >> >>
> > > >>> > >> >>
> > > >>> > >> >>
> > > >>> > >> >>> On Wed, 26 Dec 2018 21:21:34 +0100, Gilles wrote:
> > > >>> > >> >>> Hi.
> > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > >>> > >> >>>> On Wed, 26 Dec 2018 20:41:59 +0700, Maxim Solodovnik
> > > >>> wrote:
> > > >>> > >> >>>> This is a [VOTE] for releasing
> > > >>> > >> >>>> Apache Commons collections 4.3
> > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > >>> > >> >>>> Tag name:
> > > >>> > >> >>>>    collections-4.3-RC2 (signature can be checked from git
> > > >>> using
> > > >>> > >> >>>> 'git
> > > >>> > >> >>>> tag -v')
> > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > >>> > >> >>> $ git tag -v collections-4.3-RC2
> > > >>> > >> >>> error: tag 'collections-4.3-RC2' not found.
> > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > >>> > >> >>> Although I see it in the link below...
> > > >>> > >> >>> What is going on?
> > > >>> > >> >>
> > > >>> > >> >> Issue vanished with a fresh "clone".
> > > >>> > >> >> [Sorry for the noise.]
> > > >>> > >> >>
> > > >>> > >> >>
> > > >>> > >> >>>> RC1 was cancelled due to some release steps were not done
> > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > >>> > >> >>>> Tag URL:
> > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > >>> > >>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > >
> > https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=commons-collections.git;a=commit;h=77e37dbf238d26351edb29e95391e3df75095d01
> > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > >>> > >> >>>> Commit ID the tag points at:
> > > >>> > >> >>>>    77e37dbf238d26351edb29e95391e3df75095d01
> > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > >>> > >> >>>> Site:
> > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > >>> > >>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > >
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/4.3-RC2/site/index.html
> > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > >>> > >> >>> The Clirr report is still a problem:
> > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > >>> > >>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > >
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/4.3-RC2/site/clirr-report.html
> > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > >>> > >> >>> [The same errors are reported on my machine, so it's
> > > >>> > >> >>> not a cache issue...]
> > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > >>> > >> >>> Regards,
> > > >>> > >> >>> Gilles
> > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > >>> > >> >>>> Distribution files (committed at revision 31689):
> > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > >>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/
> > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > >>> > >> >>>> Distribution files hashes (SHA256):
> > > >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-bin.tar.gz
> > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > >>> > >>
> > > >>> 214c12fae27403f1a16ca6c108b5a8682be1a885a0dbbfc8eb30941303e1fe94
> > > >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-bin.zip
> > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > >>> > >>
> > > >>> 75b51a98fea6fca3746a3f70c6a0be24c99849e4976c4649214eaa5a009d0aeb
> > > >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-src.tar.gz
> > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > >>> > >>
> > > >>> 399f403feca86dbba7c4162eb90174db45979a2f7db2b3e0ba48240dc43ab434
> > > >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-src.zip
> > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > >>> > >>
> > > >>> 1c637e260b5b9e372d196593c7617ad3adedb6da3ac9196d086f9fc24401f5c3
> > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > >>> > >> >>>> KEYS file to check signatures:
> > > >>> > >> >>>>   https://www.apache.org/dist/commons/KEYS
> > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > >>> > >> >>>> Maven artifacts:
> > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > >>> > >>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > >
> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1405/
> > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > >>> > >> >>>> Please select one of the following options:
> > > >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] +1 Release it.
> > > >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] +0 Go ahead; I don't care.
> > > >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] -0 There are a few minor glitches: ...
> > > >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] -1 No, do not release it because ...
> > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > >>> > >> >>>> This vote will be open for at least 72 hours, i.e. until
> > > >>> > >> >>>> 2018-12-29T14:00:00Z
> > > >>> > >> >>>> (this is UTC time).
> > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
> WBR
> Maxim aka solomax

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE][RC2] Commons collections 4.3

Maxim Solodovnik
Actually I don't get what need to be tested :(
Can you please provide "textual description" of what need to be tested?

Current version works as expected with Java8 application, no issues
All current tests are green

On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 at 19:14, Gilles Sadowski <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hello.
>
> Le jeu. 17 janv. 2019 à 04:24, Maxim Solodovnik <[hidden email]> a
> écrit :
> >
> > Hello All,
> >
> > Shall I cancel this VOTE and change project coordinates to be
> > commons-collections5 ?
>
> I must have missed part of the thread...  IMO, a major release is not
> the answer to a possible false positive.
> Did you make the actual test (mentioned somewhere below)?
>
> Best regards,
> Gilles
>
> >
> > On Sat, 5 Jan 2019 at 01:04, Amey Jadiye <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, 4 Jan 2019, 5:25 pm Gilles <[hidden email]
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > hi.
> > > >
> > > Hi Gilles,
> > >
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, 3 Jan 2019 22:04:24 +0530, Amey Jadiye wrote:
> > > > > Hello Maxim / All
> > > > >
> > > > > I put little more efforts to find out the possible cause of the
> > > > > error.
> > > > > In the clirr code, I found the reason for this error and same is
> > > > > documented
> > > > > in clirr documentation [1].
> > > > >
> > > > > A method declaration has been added to the specified interface.
> This
> > > > > is
> > > > > always reported as a binary-compatibility error, but in practice,
> the
> > > > > changed class might be used successfully with code compiled against
> > > > > the old
> > > > > interface depending upon usage patterns.
> > > > >
> > > > > Old code which invokes methods upon code compiled against the new
> > > > > (expanded) interface will continue to work without issues. And old
> > > > > code
> > > > > which implements the old version of the interface will also
> continue
> > > > > to
> > > > > work correctly as long as no code attempts to invoke any of the
> > > > > newly-added
> > > > > methods against that instance. But the code which (validly) invokes
> > > > > one of
> > > > > the new methods in the interface against an object which implements
> > > > > only
> > > > > the old version of the interface will cause an AbstractMethodError
> to
> > > > > be
> > > > > thrown at the time the method invocation is attempted.
> > > >
> > > > IIUC, new code that calls the new methods on [Collections] classes
> > > > will crash.  Does not look good.
> > > > On the other hand, Maxim wrote earlier that a method reported by
> > > > Clirr as "new" (cf. below) was in fact present since Java 6...
> > > >
> > > > Are we then sure that it's a Clirr bug?
> > > > If so, why did you not vote "+1" (on the condition that the false
> > > > positive is mentioned in the release notes)?
> > > >
> > > > We could also make some definite progress with an actual code
> > > > example that calls the incriminated methods, compiled against the
> > > > current version of the library and then run against the current RC,
> > > > and see whether it crashes.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Thanks for directions here, I must also check that. Till then I would
> like
> > > to change my vote to -1 (Non Binding) for this release.
> > >
> > >
> > > > Alternatively, we could instate "revapi" in the POM (and disable
> > > > Clirr); and if the report is clean, trust that (though "revapi" is
> > > > still beta).
> > > >
> > > > Opinions?
> > > >
> > > > Gilles
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > In 4.2 and 4.3 looks like we have upgraded the java version[2]
> where
> > > > > for
> > > > > example for Map interface might have added a few more methods
> causing
> > > > > these
> > > > > errors.
> > > > >
> > > > > For this release, I am voting 0 (Non-Binding) as there is unharmed
> > > > > mess
> > > > > around the clirr.
> > > > >
> > > > > rest of the things are OK with this release, I would encourage to
> > > > > have
> > > > > revapi replacing clirr.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > [1]  http://clirr.sourceforge.net/clirr-core/exegesis.html
> > > > > [2]
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> https://github.com/apache/commons-collections/commit/482762a13f739631f94d03642b0a55a9b7214c44
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > > Amey
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Jan 3, 2019 at 11:53 AM Amey Jadiye <[hidden email]>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> I spared little time on finding issue however didn't found it in
> > > > >> clirr(may
> > > > >> be hidden somewhere),  today will check if clirr maven plugin have
> > > > >> any
> > > > >> issues. also I saw that few other apache commons modules having
> same
> > > > >> issue
> > > > >> and are released.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> I also gave try on revapi with commons collection4 4.3RC2.
> > > > >> revapi:check
> > > > >> was clean unlike clirr, looks promising to replace clirr.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Regards,
> > > > >> Amey
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On Wed, 2 Jan 2019, 12:31 pm Maxim Solodovnik <
> [hidden email]
> > > > >> wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >>> Hello All,
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Just checked clirr report one more time
> > > > >>> This time I took 1 error and perform investigation:
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> "Method 'public java.util.Collection values()' has been added to
> an
> > > > >>> interface" org.apache.commons.collections4.BidiMap
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> In fact I don't understand why this error was reported
> > > > >>> BidiMap extends java.util.Map
> > > > >>> Map has method "public java.util.Collection values()" in all
> > > > >>> versions:
> > > > >>> https://docs.oracle.com/javase/6/docs/api/java/util/Map.html
> > > > >>> https://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/api/java/util/Map.html
> > > > >>> https://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/api/java/util/Map.html
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Maybe its clirr issue?
> > > > >>> Would appreciate any help with this investigation
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> On Mon, 31 Dec 2018 at 16:53, Gilles <
> [hidden email]>
> > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > >>> >
> > > > >>> > On Mon, 31 Dec 2018 07:41:40 +0700, Maxim Solodovnik wrote:
> > > > >>> > > Hello Gilles,
> > > > >>> > >
> > > > >>> > > I already did analysis: [1], all errors are caused by
> previous
> > > > >>> > > release
> > > > >>> > > 4.3 doesn't introduce any new errors ...
> > > > >>> > >
> > > > >>> > > [1] https://markmail.org/message/l7ftxlvdk4yqxijt
> > > > >>> >
> > > > >>> > I had seen the post but it says:
> > > > >>> > ---
> > > > >>> > these errors are weird. Above classes has no changes comparing
> to
> > > > >>> 4.2
> > > > >>> > ---
> > > > >>> >
> > > > >>> > But IMHO it was not a conclusion: If the cause of the errors
> was
> > > > >>> > identified, it could have been mentioned in the release notes
> > > > >>> > and/or the [VOTE] email, in order to avoid further questioning.
> > > > >>> >
> > > > >>> > Is the cause the change of supported JDK?
> > > > >>> >
> > > > >>> > Regards,
> > > > >>> > Gilles
> > > > >>> >
> > > > >>> > >
> > > > >>> > > On Mon, 31 Dec 2018 at 07:26, Rob Tompkins <
> [hidden email]>
> > > > >>> > > wrote:
> > > > >>> > >>
> > > > >>> > >> I’ll give it a look tonight or in the morning.
> > > > >>> > >>
> > > > >>> > >> -Rob
> > > > >>> > >>
> > > > >>> > >> > On Dec 30, 2018, at 12:25 AM, Maxim Solodovnik
> > > > >>> > >> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > > >>> > >> >
> > > > >>> > >> > No votes after 3 days :(
> > > > >>> > >> > Is there anything wrong with the RC?
> > > > >>> > >> >
> > > > >>> > >> >> On Thu, 27 Dec 2018 at 05:20, Bruno P. Kinoshita
> > > > >>> > >> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > >>> > >> >> FWIW I had a similar experience, and realized I was doing
> > > > >>> `git
> > > > >>> > >> fetch --all`, but it didn't bring the tags. `git fetch
> --tags`
> > > > >>> did
> > > > >>> the
> > > > >>> > >> trick. After that I could `git checkout $tag-name`
> > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > >>> > >> >> Cheers
> > > > >>> > >> >> Bruno
> > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > >>> > >> >> ________________________________
> > > > >>> > >> >> From: Gilles <[hidden email]>
> > > > >>> > >> >> To: [hidden email]
> > > > >>> > >> >> Sent: Thursday, 27 December 2018 9:26 AM
> > > > >>> > >> >> Subject: Re: [VOTE][RC2] Commons collections 4.3
> > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > >>> > >> >>> On Wed, 26 Dec 2018 21:21:34 +0100, Gilles wrote:
> > > > >>> > >> >>> Hi.
> > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > >>> > >> >>>> On Wed, 26 Dec 2018 20:41:59 +0700, Maxim Solodovnik
> > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > >>> > >> >>>> This is a [VOTE] for releasing
> > > > >>> > >> >>>> Apache Commons collections 4.3
> > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > >>> > >> >>>> Tag name:
> > > > >>> > >> >>>>    collections-4.3-RC2 (signature can be checked from
> git
> > > > >>> using
> > > > >>> > >> >>>> 'git
> > > > >>> > >> >>>> tag -v')
> > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > >>> > >> >>> $ git tag -v collections-4.3-RC2
> > > > >>> > >> >>> error: tag 'collections-4.3-RC2' not found.
> > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > >>> > >> >>> Although I see it in the link below...
> > > > >>> > >> >>> What is going on?
> > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > >>> > >> >> Issue vanished with a fresh "clone".
> > > > >>> > >> >> [Sorry for the noise.]
> > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > >>> > >> >>>> RC1 was cancelled due to some release steps were not
> done
> > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > >>> > >> >>>> Tag URL:
> > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > >>> > >>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > >
> > >
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=commons-collections.git;a=commit;h=77e37dbf238d26351edb29e95391e3df75095d01
> > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > >>> > >> >>>> Commit ID the tag points at:
> > > > >>> > >> >>>>    77e37dbf238d26351edb29e95391e3df75095d01
> > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > >>> > >> >>>> Site:
> > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > >>> > >>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > >
> > >
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/4.3-RC2/site/index.html
> > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > >>> > >> >>> The Clirr report is still a problem:
> > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > >>> > >>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > >
> > >
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/4.3-RC2/site/clirr-report.html
> > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > >>> > >> >>> [The same errors are reported on my machine, so it's
> > > > >>> > >> >>> not a cache issue...]
> > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > >>> > >> >>> Regards,
> > > > >>> > >> >>> Gilles
> > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > >>> > >> >>>> Distribution files (committed at revision 31689):
> > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > >>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/
> > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > >>> > >> >>>> Distribution files hashes (SHA256):
> > > > >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-bin.tar.gz
> > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > >>> > >>
> > > > >>> 214c12fae27403f1a16ca6c108b5a8682be1a885a0dbbfc8eb30941303e1fe94
> > > > >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-bin.zip
> > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > >>> > >>
> > > > >>> 75b51a98fea6fca3746a3f70c6a0be24c99849e4976c4649214eaa5a009d0aeb
> > > > >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-src.tar.gz
> > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > >>> > >>
> > > > >>> 399f403feca86dbba7c4162eb90174db45979a2f7db2b3e0ba48240dc43ab434
> > > > >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-src.zip
> > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > >>> > >>
> > > > >>> 1c637e260b5b9e372d196593c7617ad3adedb6da3ac9196d086f9fc24401f5c3
> > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > >>> > >> >>>> KEYS file to check signatures:
> > > > >>> > >> >>>>   https://www.apache.org/dist/commons/KEYS
> > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > >>> > >> >>>> Maven artifacts:
> > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > >>> > >>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > >
> > >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1405/
> > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > >>> > >> >>>> Please select one of the following options:
> > > > >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] +1 Release it.
> > > > >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] +0 Go ahead; I don't care.
> > > > >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] -0 There are a few minor glitches: ...
> > > > >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] -1 No, do not release it because ...
> > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > >>> > >> >>>> This vote will be open for at least 72 hours, i.e.
> until
> > > > >>> > >> >>>> 2018-12-29T14:00:00Z
> > > > >>> > >> >>>> (this is UTC time).
> > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > WBR
> > Maxim aka solomax
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>

--
WBR
Maxim aka solomax
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE][RC2] Commons collections 4.3

Gilles Sadowski-2
Le jeu. 17 janv. 2019 à 16:17, Maxim Solodovnik <[hidden email]> a écrit :
>
> Actually I don't get what need to be tested :(
> Can you please provide "textual description" of what need to be tested?

Pasted from below:
> > > > > We could also make some definite progress with an actual code
> > > > > example that calls the incriminated methods, compiled against the
> > > > > current version of the library and then run against the current RC,
> > > > > and see whether it crashes.

> Current version works as expected with Java8 application, no issues

Then: Why a new major version?
It looks like sweeping dust under the carpet. ;-)

If nobody wants to write a test, then we could just release the current
RC (with a mention that Clirr signals errors that we chose to ignore),
and if someone complains later on (if indeed BC would have been broken),
release a bugfix version.

Regards,
Gilles

> All current tests are green
>
> On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 at 19:14, Gilles Sadowski <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Hello.
> >
> > Le jeu. 17 janv. 2019 à 04:24, Maxim Solodovnik <[hidden email]> a
> > écrit :
> > >
> > > Hello All,
> > >
> > > Shall I cancel this VOTE and change project coordinates to be
> > > commons-collections5 ?
> >
> > I must have missed part of the thread...  IMO, a major release is not
> > the answer to a possible false positive.
> > Did you make the actual test (mentioned somewhere below)?
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Gilles
> >
> > >
> > > On Sat, 5 Jan 2019 at 01:04, Amey Jadiye <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Fri, 4 Jan 2019, 5:25 pm Gilles <[hidden email]
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > hi.
> > > > >
> > > > Hi Gilles,
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, 3 Jan 2019 22:04:24 +0530, Amey Jadiye wrote:
> > > > > > Hello Maxim / All
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I put little more efforts to find out the possible cause of the
> > > > > > error.
> > > > > > In the clirr code, I found the reason for this error and same is
> > > > > > documented
> > > > > > in clirr documentation [1].
> > > > > >
> > > > > > A method declaration has been added to the specified interface.
> > This
> > > > > > is
> > > > > > always reported as a binary-compatibility error, but in practice,
> > the
> > > > > > changed class might be used successfully with code compiled against
> > > > > > the old
> > > > > > interface depending upon usage patterns.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Old code which invokes methods upon code compiled against the new
> > > > > > (expanded) interface will continue to work without issues. And old
> > > > > > code
> > > > > > which implements the old version of the interface will also
> > continue
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > work correctly as long as no code attempts to invoke any of the
> > > > > > newly-added
> > > > > > methods against that instance. But the code which (validly) invokes
> > > > > > one of
> > > > > > the new methods in the interface against an object which implements
> > > > > > only
> > > > > > the old version of the interface will cause an AbstractMethodError
> > to
> > > > > > be
> > > > > > thrown at the time the method invocation is attempted.
> > > > >
> > > > > IIUC, new code that calls the new methods on [Collections] classes
> > > > > will crash.  Does not look good.
> > > > > On the other hand, Maxim wrote earlier that a method reported by
> > > > > Clirr as "new" (cf. below) was in fact present since Java 6...
> > > > >
> > > > > Are we then sure that it's a Clirr bug?
> > > > > If so, why did you not vote "+1" (on the condition that the false
> > > > > positive is mentioned in the release notes)?
> > > > >
> > > > > We could also make some definite progress with an actual code
> > > > > example that calls the incriminated methods, compiled against the
> > > > > current version of the library and then run against the current RC,
> > > > > and see whether it crashes.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for directions here, I must also check that. Till then I would
> > like
> > > > to change my vote to -1 (Non Binding) for this release.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Alternatively, we could instate "revapi" in the POM (and disable
> > > > > Clirr); and if the report is clean, trust that (though "revapi" is
> > > > > still beta).
> > > > >
> > > > > Opinions?
> > > > >
> > > > > Gilles
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In 4.2 and 4.3 looks like we have upgraded the java version[2]
> > where
> > > > > > for
> > > > > > example for Map interface might have added a few more methods
> > causing
> > > > > > these
> > > > > > errors.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > For this release, I am voting 0 (Non-Binding) as there is unharmed
> > > > > > mess
> > > > > > around the clirr.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > rest of the things are OK with this release, I would encourage to
> > > > > > have
> > > > > > revapi replacing clirr.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [1]  http://clirr.sourceforge.net/clirr-core/exegesis.html
> > > > > > [2]
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > https://github.com/apache/commons-collections/commit/482762a13f739631f94d03642b0a55a9b7214c44
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > Amey
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, Jan 3, 2019 at 11:53 AM Amey Jadiye <[hidden email]>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> I spared little time on finding issue however didn't found it in
> > > > > >> clirr(may
> > > > > >> be hidden somewhere),  today will check if clirr maven plugin have
> > > > > >> any
> > > > > >> issues. also I saw that few other apache commons modules having
> > same
> > > > > >> issue
> > > > > >> and are released.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> I also gave try on revapi with commons collection4 4.3RC2.
> > > > > >> revapi:check
> > > > > >> was clean unlike clirr, looks promising to replace clirr.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Regards,
> > > > > >> Amey
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> On Wed, 2 Jan 2019, 12:31 pm Maxim Solodovnik <
> > [hidden email]
> > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>> Hello All,
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> Just checked clirr report one more time
> > > > > >>> This time I took 1 error and perform investigation:
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> "Method 'public java.util.Collection values()' has been added to
> > an
> > > > > >>> interface" org.apache.commons.collections4.BidiMap
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> In fact I don't understand why this error was reported
> > > > > >>> BidiMap extends java.util.Map
> > > > > >>> Map has method "public java.util.Collection values()" in all
> > > > > >>> versions:
> > > > > >>> https://docs.oracle.com/javase/6/docs/api/java/util/Map.html
> > > > > >>> https://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/api/java/util/Map.html
> > > > > >>> https://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/api/java/util/Map.html
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> Maybe its clirr issue?
> > > > > >>> Would appreciate any help with this investigation
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> On Mon, 31 Dec 2018 at 16:53, Gilles <
> > [hidden email]>
> > > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > > >>> >
> > > > > >>> > On Mon, 31 Dec 2018 07:41:40 +0700, Maxim Solodovnik wrote:
> > > > > >>> > > Hello Gilles,
> > > > > >>> > >
> > > > > >>> > > I already did analysis: [1], all errors are caused by
> > previous
> > > > > >>> > > release
> > > > > >>> > > 4.3 doesn't introduce any new errors ...
> > > > > >>> > >
> > > > > >>> > > [1] https://markmail.org/message/l7ftxlvdk4yqxijt
> > > > > >>> >
> > > > > >>> > I had seen the post but it says:
> > > > > >>> > ---
> > > > > >>> > these errors are weird. Above classes has no changes comparing
> > to
> > > > > >>> 4.2
> > > > > >>> > ---
> > > > > >>> >
> > > > > >>> > But IMHO it was not a conclusion: If the cause of the errors
> > was
> > > > > >>> > identified, it could have been mentioned in the release notes
> > > > > >>> > and/or the [VOTE] email, in order to avoid further questioning.
> > > > > >>> >
> > > > > >>> > Is the cause the change of supported JDK?
> > > > > >>> >
> > > > > >>> > Regards,
> > > > > >>> > Gilles
> > > > > >>> >
> > > > > >>> > >
> > > > > >>> > > On Mon, 31 Dec 2018 at 07:26, Rob Tompkins <
> > [hidden email]>
> > > > > >>> > > wrote:
> > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > >>> > >> I’ll give it a look tonight or in the morning.
> > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > >>> > >> -Rob
> > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > >>> > >> > On Dec 30, 2018, at 12:25 AM, Maxim Solodovnik
> > > > > >>> > >> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > > > >>> > >> >
> > > > > >>> > >> > No votes after 3 days :(
> > > > > >>> > >> > Is there anything wrong with the RC?
> > > > > >>> > >> >
> > > > > >>> > >> >> On Thu, 27 Dec 2018 at 05:20, Bruno P. Kinoshita
> > > > > >>> > >> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > >>> > >> >> FWIW I had a similar experience, and realized I was doing
> > > > > >>> `git
> > > > > >>> > >> fetch --all`, but it didn't bring the tags. `git fetch
> > --tags`
> > > > > >>> did
> > > > > >>> the
> > > > > >>> > >> trick. After that I could `git checkout $tag-name`
> > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > >>> > >> >> Cheers
> > > > > >>> > >> >> Bruno
> > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > >>> > >> >> ________________________________
> > > > > >>> > >> >> From: Gilles <[hidden email]>
> > > > > >>> > >> >> To: [hidden email]
> > > > > >>> > >> >> Sent: Thursday, 27 December 2018 9:26 AM
> > > > > >>> > >> >> Subject: Re: [VOTE][RC2] Commons collections 4.3
> > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > >>> > >> >>> On Wed, 26 Dec 2018 21:21:34 +0100, Gilles wrote:
> > > > > >>> > >> >>> Hi.
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>> On Wed, 26 Dec 2018 20:41:59 +0700, Maxim Solodovnik
> > > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>> This is a [VOTE] for releasing
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Apache Commons collections 4.3
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Tag name:
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>>    collections-4.3-RC2 (signature can be checked from
> > git
> > > > > >>> using
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>> 'git
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>> tag -v')
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > > >>> > >> >>> $ git tag -v collections-4.3-RC2
> > > > > >>> > >> >>> error: tag 'collections-4.3-RC2' not found.
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > > >>> > >> >>> Although I see it in the link below...
> > > > > >>> > >> >>> What is going on?
> > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > >>> > >> >> Issue vanished with a fresh "clone".
> > > > > >>> > >> >> [Sorry for the noise.]
> > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>> RC1 was cancelled due to some release steps were not
> > done
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Tag URL:
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > >
> > > >
> > https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=commons-collections.git;a=commit;h=77e37dbf238d26351edb29e95391e3df75095d01
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Commit ID the tag points at:
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>>    77e37dbf238d26351edb29e95391e3df75095d01
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Site:
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > >
> > > >
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/4.3-RC2/site/index.html
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > > >>> > >> >>> The Clirr report is still a problem:
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > >
> > > >
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/4.3-RC2/site/clirr-report.html
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > > >>> > >> >>> [The same errors are reported on my machine, so it's
> > > > > >>> > >> >>> not a cache issue...]
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > > >>> > >> >>> Regards,
> > > > > >>> > >> >>> Gilles
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Distribution files (committed at revision 31689):
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > >>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Distribution files hashes (SHA256):
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-bin.tar.gz
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > >>> 214c12fae27403f1a16ca6c108b5a8682be1a885a0dbbfc8eb30941303e1fe94
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-bin.zip
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > >>> 75b51a98fea6fca3746a3f70c6a0be24c99849e4976c4649214eaa5a009d0aeb
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-src.tar.gz
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > >>> 399f403feca86dbba7c4162eb90174db45979a2f7db2b3e0ba48240dc43ab434
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-src.zip
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > >>> 1c637e260b5b9e372d196593c7617ad3adedb6da3ac9196d086f9fc24401f5c3
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>> KEYS file to check signatures:
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>>   https://www.apache.org/dist/commons/KEYS
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Maven artifacts:
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > >
> > > >
> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1405/
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Please select one of the following options:
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] +1 Release it.
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] +0 Go ahead; I don't care.
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] -0 There are a few minor glitches: ...
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] -1 No, do not release it because ...
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>> This vote will be open for at least 72 hours, i.e.
> > until
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>> 2018-12-29T14:00:00Z
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>> (this is UTC time).
> > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > WBR
> > > Maxim aka solomax
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >
> >
>
> --
> WBR
> Maxim aka solomax

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE][RC2] Commons collections 4.3

Maxim Solodovnik
It seems to be "stalemate situation"
The test wasn't written for a long period of time
And there not enough votes to release :(

On Thu, Jan 17, 2019, 22:59 Gilles Sadowski <[hidden email] wrote:

> Le jeu. 17 janv. 2019 à 16:17, Maxim Solodovnik <[hidden email]> a
> écrit :
> >
> > Actually I don't get what need to be tested :(
> > Can you please provide "textual description" of what need to be tested?
>
> Pasted from below:
> > > > > > We could also make some definite progress with an actual code
> > > > > > example that calls the incriminated methods, compiled against the
> > > > > > current version of the library and then run against the current
> RC,
> > > > > > and see whether it crashes.
>
> > Current version works as expected with Java8 application, no issues
>
> Then: Why a new major version?
> It looks like sweeping dust under the carpet. ;-)
>
> If nobody wants to write a test, then we could just release the current
> RC (with a mention that Clirr signals errors that we chose to ignore),
> and if someone complains later on (if indeed BC would have been broken),
> release a bugfix version.
>
> Regards,
> Gilles
>
> > All current tests are green
> >
> > On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 at 19:14, Gilles Sadowski <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Hello.
> > >
> > > Le jeu. 17 janv. 2019 à 04:24, Maxim Solodovnik <[hidden email]>
> a
> > > écrit :
> > > >
> > > > Hello All,
> > > >
> > > > Shall I cancel this VOTE and change project coordinates to be
> > > > commons-collections5 ?
> > >
> > > I must have missed part of the thread...  IMO, a major release is not
> > > the answer to a possible false positive.
> > > Did you make the actual test (mentioned somewhere below)?
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > > Gilles
> > >
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, 5 Jan 2019 at 01:04, Amey Jadiye <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Fri, 4 Jan 2019, 5:25 pm Gilles <[hidden email]
> > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > hi.
> > > > > >
> > > > > Hi Gilles,
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, 3 Jan 2019 22:04:24 +0530, Amey Jadiye wrote:
> > > > > > > Hello Maxim / All
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I put little more efforts to find out the possible cause of the
> > > > > > > error.
> > > > > > > In the clirr code, I found the reason for this error and same
> is
> > > > > > > documented
> > > > > > > in clirr documentation [1].
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > A method declaration has been added to the specified interface.
> > > This
> > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > always reported as a binary-compatibility error, but in
> practice,
> > > the
> > > > > > > changed class might be used successfully with code compiled
> against
> > > > > > > the old
> > > > > > > interface depending upon usage patterns.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Old code which invokes methods upon code compiled against the
> new
> > > > > > > (expanded) interface will continue to work without issues. And
> old
> > > > > > > code
> > > > > > > which implements the old version of the interface will also
> > > continue
> > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > work correctly as long as no code attempts to invoke any of the
> > > > > > > newly-added
> > > > > > > methods against that instance. But the code which (validly)
> invokes
> > > > > > > one of
> > > > > > > the new methods in the interface against an object which
> implements
> > > > > > > only
> > > > > > > the old version of the interface will cause an
> AbstractMethodError
> > > to
> > > > > > > be
> > > > > > > thrown at the time the method invocation is attempted.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > IIUC, new code that calls the new methods on [Collections]
> classes
> > > > > > will crash.  Does not look good.
> > > > > > On the other hand, Maxim wrote earlier that a method reported by
> > > > > > Clirr as "new" (cf. below) was in fact present since Java 6...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Are we then sure that it's a Clirr bug?
> > > > > > If so, why did you not vote "+1" (on the condition that the false
> > > > > > positive is mentioned in the release notes)?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > We could also make some definite progress with an actual code
> > > > > > example that calls the incriminated methods, compiled against the
> > > > > > current version of the library and then run against the current
> RC,
> > > > > > and see whether it crashes.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks for directions here, I must also check that. Till then I
> would
> > > like
> > > > > to change my vote to -1 (Non Binding) for this release.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > Alternatively, we could instate "revapi" in the POM (and disable
> > > > > > Clirr); and if the report is clean, trust that (though "revapi"
> is
> > > > > > still beta).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Opinions?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Gilles
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > In 4.2 and 4.3 looks like we have upgraded the java version[2]
> > > where
> > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > example for Map interface might have added a few more methods
> > > causing
> > > > > > > these
> > > > > > > errors.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > For this release, I am voting 0 (Non-Binding) as there is
> unharmed
> > > > > > > mess
> > > > > > > around the clirr.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > rest of the things are OK with this release, I would encourage
> to
> > > > > > > have
> > > > > > > revapi replacing clirr.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > [1]  http://clirr.sourceforge.net/clirr-core/exegesis.html
> > > > > > > [2]
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> https://github.com/apache/commons-collections/commit/482762a13f739631f94d03642b0a55a9b7214c44
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > > Amey
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Thu, Jan 3, 2019 at 11:53 AM Amey Jadiye <
> [hidden email]>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> I spared little time on finding issue however didn't found it
> in
> > > > > > >> clirr(may
> > > > > > >> be hidden somewhere),  today will check if clirr maven plugin
> have
> > > > > > >> any
> > > > > > >> issues. also I saw that few other apache commons modules
> having
> > > same
> > > > > > >> issue
> > > > > > >> and are released.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> I also gave try on revapi with commons collection4 4.3RC2.
> > > > > > >> revapi:check
> > > > > > >> was clean unlike clirr, looks promising to replace clirr.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Regards,
> > > > > > >> Amey
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> On Wed, 2 Jan 2019, 12:31 pm Maxim Solodovnik <
> > > [hidden email]
> > > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>> Hello All,
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>> Just checked clirr report one more time
> > > > > > >>> This time I took 1 error and perform investigation:
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>> "Method 'public java.util.Collection values()' has been
> added to
> > > an
> > > > > > >>> interface" org.apache.commons.collections4.BidiMap
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>> In fact I don't understand why this error was reported
> > > > > > >>> BidiMap extends java.util.Map
> > > > > > >>> Map has method "public java.util.Collection values()" in all
> > > > > > >>> versions:
> > > > > > >>> https://docs.oracle.com/javase/6/docs/api/java/util/Map.html
> > > > > > >>> https://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/api/java/util/Map.html
> > > > > > >>> https://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/api/java/util/Map.html
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>> Maybe its clirr issue?
> > > > > > >>> Would appreciate any help with this investigation
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>> On Mon, 31 Dec 2018 at 16:53, Gilles <
> > > [hidden email]>
> > > > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > > > >>> >
> > > > > > >>> > On Mon, 31 Dec 2018 07:41:40 +0700, Maxim Solodovnik wrote:
> > > > > > >>> > > Hello Gilles,
> > > > > > >>> > >
> > > > > > >>> > > I already did analysis: [1], all errors are caused by
> > > previous
> > > > > > >>> > > release
> > > > > > >>> > > 4.3 doesn't introduce any new errors ...
> > > > > > >>> > >
> > > > > > >>> > > [1] https://markmail.org/message/l7ftxlvdk4yqxijt
> > > > > > >>> >
> > > > > > >>> > I had seen the post but it says:
> > > > > > >>> > ---
> > > > > > >>> > these errors are weird. Above classes has no changes
> comparing
> > > to
> > > > > > >>> 4.2
> > > > > > >>> > ---
> > > > > > >>> >
> > > > > > >>> > But IMHO it was not a conclusion: If the cause of the
> errors
> > > was
> > > > > > >>> > identified, it could have been mentioned in the release
> notes
> > > > > > >>> > and/or the [VOTE] email, in order to avoid further
> questioning.
> > > > > > >>> >
> > > > > > >>> > Is the cause the change of supported JDK?
> > > > > > >>> >
> > > > > > >>> > Regards,
> > > > > > >>> > Gilles
> > > > > > >>> >
> > > > > > >>> > >
> > > > > > >>> > > On Mon, 31 Dec 2018 at 07:26, Rob Tompkins <
> > > [hidden email]>
> > > > > > >>> > > wrote:
> > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > > >>> > >> I’ll give it a look tonight or in the morning.
> > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > > >>> > >> -Rob
> > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > > >>> > >> > On Dec 30, 2018, at 12:25 AM, Maxim Solodovnik
> > > > > > >>> > >> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > > > > >>> > >> >
> > > > > > >>> > >> > No votes after 3 days :(
> > > > > > >>> > >> > Is there anything wrong with the RC?
> > > > > > >>> > >> >
> > > > > > >>> > >> >> On Thu, 27 Dec 2018 at 05:20, Bruno P. Kinoshita
> > > > > > >>> > >> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > > >>> > >> >> FWIW I had a similar experience, and realized I was
> doing
> > > > > > >>> `git
> > > > > > >>> > >> fetch --all`, but it didn't bring the tags. `git fetch
> > > --tags`
> > > > > > >>> did
> > > > > > >>> the
> > > > > > >>> > >> trick. After that I could `git checkout $tag-name`
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > > >>> > >> >> Cheers
> > > > > > >>> > >> >> Bruno
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > > >>> > >> >> ________________________________
> > > > > > >>> > >> >> From: Gilles <[hidden email]>
> > > > > > >>> > >> >> To: [hidden email]
> > > > > > >>> > >> >> Sent: Thursday, 27 December 2018 9:26 AM
> > > > > > >>> > >> >> Subject: Re: [VOTE][RC2] Commons collections 4.3
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>> On Wed, 26 Dec 2018 21:21:34 +0100, Gilles wrote:
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>> Hi.
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> On Wed, 26 Dec 2018 20:41:59 +0700, Maxim
> Solodovnik
> > > > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> This is a [VOTE] for releasing
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Apache Commons collections 4.3
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Tag name:
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>    collections-4.3-RC2 (signature can be checked
> from
> > > git
> > > > > > >>> using
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> 'git
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> tag -v')
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>> $ git tag -v collections-4.3-RC2
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>> error: tag 'collections-4.3-RC2' not found.
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>> Although I see it in the link below...
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>> What is going on?
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > > >>> > >> >> Issue vanished with a fresh "clone".
> > > > > > >>> > >> >> [Sorry for the noise.]
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> RC1 was cancelled due to some release steps were
> not
> > > done
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Tag URL:
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=commons-collections.git;a=commit;h=77e37dbf238d26351edb29e95391e3df75095d01
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Commit ID the tag points at:
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>    77e37dbf238d26351edb29e95391e3df75095d01
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Site:
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/4.3-RC2/site/index.html
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>> The Clirr report is still a problem:
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/4.3-RC2/site/clirr-report.html
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>> [The same errors are reported on my machine, so it's
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>> not a cache issue...]
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>> Regards,
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>> Gilles
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Distribution files (committed at revision 31689):
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > >>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Distribution files hashes (SHA256):
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-bin.tar.gz
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > > >>>
> 214c12fae27403f1a16ca6c108b5a8682be1a885a0dbbfc8eb30941303e1fe94
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-bin.zip
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > > >>>
> 75b51a98fea6fca3746a3f70c6a0be24c99849e4976c4649214eaa5a009d0aeb
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-src.tar.gz
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > > >>>
> 399f403feca86dbba7c4162eb90174db45979a2f7db2b3e0ba48240dc43ab434
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-src.zip
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > > >>>
> 1c637e260b5b9e372d196593c7617ad3adedb6da3ac9196d086f9fc24401f5c3
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> KEYS file to check signatures:
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>   https://www.apache.org/dist/commons/KEYS
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Maven artifacts:
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1405/
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Please select one of the following options:
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] +1 Release it.
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] +0 Go ahead; I don't care.
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] -0 There are a few minor glitches: ...
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] -1 No, do not release it because ...
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> This vote will be open for at least 72 hours, i.e.
> > > until
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> 2018-12-29T14:00:00Z
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> (this is UTC time).
> > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > WBR
> > > > Maxim aka solomax
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> > WBR
> > Maxim aka solomax
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE][RC2] Commons collections 4.3

Gilles Sadowski-2
Hi.

Le jeu. 17 janv. 2019 à 17:21, Maxim Solodovnik <[hidden email]> a écrit :
>
> It seems to be "stalemate situation"
> The test wasn't written for a long period of time

Writing the test would seem to be the best chance.

What is still not clear to me is whether the previous version
was released with Clirr errors too.
If yes, then the question might become: Why ask you to fix
what was broken before?
If not, then you could look whether the Clirr version was
changed in the meantime, and if so, run the older versions
of the tool until the issue disappears.

> And there not enough votes to release :(

That's an ever more recurring issue within "Commons", and
the PMC does not seem intent on recognizing it. :-/

Regards,
Gilles

> On Thu, Jan 17, 2019, 22:59 Gilles Sadowski <[hidden email] wrote:
>
> > Le jeu. 17 janv. 2019 à 16:17, Maxim Solodovnik <[hidden email]> a
> > écrit :
> > >
> > > Actually I don't get what need to be tested :(
> > > Can you please provide "textual description" of what need to be tested?
> >
> > Pasted from below:
> > > > > > > We could also make some definite progress with an actual code
> > > > > > > example that calls the incriminated methods, compiled against the
> > > > > > > current version of the library and then run against the current
> > RC,
> > > > > > > and see whether it crashes.
> >
> > > Current version works as expected with Java8 application, no issues
> >
> > Then: Why a new major version?
> > It looks like sweeping dust under the carpet. ;-)
> >
> > If nobody wants to write a test, then we could just release the current
> > RC (with a mention that Clirr signals errors that we chose to ignore),
> > and if someone complains later on (if indeed BC would have been broken),
> > release a bugfix version.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Gilles
> >
> > > All current tests are green
> > >
> > > On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 at 19:14, Gilles Sadowski <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hello.
> > > >
> > > > Le jeu. 17 janv. 2019 à 04:24, Maxim Solodovnik <[hidden email]>
> > a
> > > > écrit :
> > > > >
> > > > > Hello All,
> > > > >
> > > > > Shall I cancel this VOTE and change project coordinates to be
> > > > > commons-collections5 ?
> > > >
> > > > I must have missed part of the thread...  IMO, a major release is not
> > > > the answer to a possible false positive.
> > > > Did you make the actual test (mentioned somewhere below)?
> > > >
> > > > Best regards,
> > > > Gilles
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sat, 5 Jan 2019 at 01:04, Amey Jadiye <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Fri, 4 Jan 2019, 5:25 pm Gilles <[hidden email]
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > hi.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > Hi Gilles,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Thu, 3 Jan 2019 22:04:24 +0530, Amey Jadiye wrote:
> > > > > > > > Hello Maxim / All
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I put little more efforts to find out the possible cause of the
> > > > > > > > error.
> > > > > > > > In the clirr code, I found the reason for this error and same
> > is
> > > > > > > > documented
> > > > > > > > in clirr documentation [1].
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > A method declaration has been added to the specified interface.
> > > > This
> > > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > always reported as a binary-compatibility error, but in
> > practice,
> > > > the
> > > > > > > > changed class might be used successfully with code compiled
> > against
> > > > > > > > the old
> > > > > > > > interface depending upon usage patterns.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Old code which invokes methods upon code compiled against the
> > new
> > > > > > > > (expanded) interface will continue to work without issues. And
> > old
> > > > > > > > code
> > > > > > > > which implements the old version of the interface will also
> > > > continue
> > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > work correctly as long as no code attempts to invoke any of the
> > > > > > > > newly-added
> > > > > > > > methods against that instance. But the code which (validly)
> > invokes
> > > > > > > > one of
> > > > > > > > the new methods in the interface against an object which
> > implements
> > > > > > > > only
> > > > > > > > the old version of the interface will cause an
> > AbstractMethodError
> > > > to
> > > > > > > > be
> > > > > > > > thrown at the time the method invocation is attempted.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > IIUC, new code that calls the new methods on [Collections]
> > classes
> > > > > > > will crash.  Does not look good.
> > > > > > > On the other hand, Maxim wrote earlier that a method reported by
> > > > > > > Clirr as "new" (cf. below) was in fact present since Java 6...
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Are we then sure that it's a Clirr bug?
> > > > > > > If so, why did you not vote "+1" (on the condition that the false
> > > > > > > positive is mentioned in the release notes)?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > We could also make some definite progress with an actual code
> > > > > > > example that calls the incriminated methods, compiled against the
> > > > > > > current version of the library and then run against the current
> > RC,
> > > > > > > and see whether it crashes.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks for directions here, I must also check that. Till then I
> > would
> > > > like
> > > > > > to change my vote to -1 (Non Binding) for this release.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Alternatively, we could instate "revapi" in the POM (and disable
> > > > > > > Clirr); and if the report is clean, trust that (though "revapi"
> > is
> > > > > > > still beta).
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Opinions?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Gilles
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > In 4.2 and 4.3 looks like we have upgraded the java version[2]
> > > > where
> > > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > example for Map interface might have added a few more methods
> > > > causing
> > > > > > > > these
> > > > > > > > errors.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > For this release, I am voting 0 (Non-Binding) as there is
> > unharmed
> > > > > > > > mess
> > > > > > > > around the clirr.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > rest of the things are OK with this release, I would encourage
> > to
> > > > > > > > have
> > > > > > > > revapi replacing clirr.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > [1]  http://clirr.sourceforge.net/clirr-core/exegesis.html
> > > > > > > > [2]
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > https://github.com/apache/commons-collections/commit/482762a13f739631f94d03642b0a55a9b7214c44
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > > > Amey
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Thu, Jan 3, 2019 at 11:53 AM Amey Jadiye <
> > [hidden email]>
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >> I spared little time on finding issue however didn't found it
> > in
> > > > > > > >> clirr(may
> > > > > > > >> be hidden somewhere),  today will check if clirr maven plugin
> > have
> > > > > > > >> any
> > > > > > > >> issues. also I saw that few other apache commons modules
> > having
> > > > same
> > > > > > > >> issue
> > > > > > > >> and are released.
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> I also gave try on revapi with commons collection4 4.3RC2.
> > > > > > > >> revapi:check
> > > > > > > >> was clean unlike clirr, looks promising to replace clirr.
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> Regards,
> > > > > > > >> Amey
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> On Wed, 2 Jan 2019, 12:31 pm Maxim Solodovnik <
> > > > [hidden email]
> > > > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >>> Hello All,
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >>> Just checked clirr report one more time
> > > > > > > >>> This time I took 1 error and perform investigation:
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >>> "Method 'public java.util.Collection values()' has been
> > added to
> > > > an
> > > > > > > >>> interface" org.apache.commons.collections4.BidiMap
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >>> In fact I don't understand why this error was reported
> > > > > > > >>> BidiMap extends java.util.Map
> > > > > > > >>> Map has method "public java.util.Collection values()" in all
> > > > > > > >>> versions:
> > > > > > > >>> https://docs.oracle.com/javase/6/docs/api/java/util/Map.html
> > > > > > > >>> https://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/api/java/util/Map.html
> > > > > > > >>> https://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/api/java/util/Map.html
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >>> Maybe its clirr issue?
> > > > > > > >>> Would appreciate any help with this investigation
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >>> On Mon, 31 Dec 2018 at 16:53, Gilles <
> > > > [hidden email]>
> > > > > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > > > > >>> >
> > > > > > > >>> > On Mon, 31 Dec 2018 07:41:40 +0700, Maxim Solodovnik wrote:
> > > > > > > >>> > > Hello Gilles,
> > > > > > > >>> > >
> > > > > > > >>> > > I already did analysis: [1], all errors are caused by
> > > > previous
> > > > > > > >>> > > release
> > > > > > > >>> > > 4.3 doesn't introduce any new errors ...
> > > > > > > >>> > >
> > > > > > > >>> > > [1] https://markmail.org/message/l7ftxlvdk4yqxijt
> > > > > > > >>> >
> > > > > > > >>> > I had seen the post but it says:
> > > > > > > >>> > ---
> > > > > > > >>> > these errors are weird. Above classes has no changes
> > comparing
> > > > to
> > > > > > > >>> 4.2
> > > > > > > >>> > ---
> > > > > > > >>> >
> > > > > > > >>> > But IMHO it was not a conclusion: If the cause of the
> > errors
> > > > was
> > > > > > > >>> > identified, it could have been mentioned in the release
> > notes
> > > > > > > >>> > and/or the [VOTE] email, in order to avoid further
> > questioning.
> > > > > > > >>> >
> > > > > > > >>> > Is the cause the change of supported JDK?
> > > > > > > >>> >
> > > > > > > >>> > Regards,
> > > > > > > >>> > Gilles
> > > > > > > >>> >
> > > > > > > >>> > >
> > > > > > > >>> > > On Mon, 31 Dec 2018 at 07:26, Rob Tompkins <
> > > > [hidden email]>
> > > > > > > >>> > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > > > >>> > >> I’ll give it a look tonight or in the morning.
> > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > > > >>> > >> -Rob
> > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > > > >>> > >> > On Dec 30, 2018, at 12:25 AM, Maxim Solodovnik
> > > > > > > >>> > >> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >
> > > > > > > >>> > >> > No votes after 3 days :(
> > > > > > > >>> > >> > Is there anything wrong with the RC?
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >> On Thu, 27 Dec 2018 at 05:20, Bruno P. Kinoshita
> > > > > > > >>> > >> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >> FWIW I had a similar experience, and realized I was
> > doing
> > > > > > > >>> `git
> > > > > > > >>> > >> fetch --all`, but it didn't bring the tags. `git fetch
> > > > --tags`
> > > > > > > >>> did
> > > > > > > >>> the
> > > > > > > >>> > >> trick. After that I could `git checkout $tag-name`
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >> Cheers
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >> Bruno
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >> ________________________________
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >> From: Gilles <[hidden email]>
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >> To: [hidden email]
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >> Sent: Thursday, 27 December 2018 9:26 AM
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >> Subject: Re: [VOTE][RC2] Commons collections 4.3
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> On Wed, 26 Dec 2018 21:21:34 +0100, Gilles wrote:
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> Hi.
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> On Wed, 26 Dec 2018 20:41:59 +0700, Maxim
> > Solodovnik
> > > > > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> This is a [VOTE] for releasing
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Apache Commons collections 4.3
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Tag name:
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>    collections-4.3-RC2 (signature can be checked
> > from
> > > > git
> > > > > > > >>> using
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> 'git
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> tag -v')
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> $ git tag -v collections-4.3-RC2
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> error: tag 'collections-4.3-RC2' not found.
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> Although I see it in the link below...
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> What is going on?
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >> Issue vanished with a fresh "clone".
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >> [Sorry for the noise.]
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> RC1 was cancelled due to some release steps were
> > not
> > > > done
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Tag URL:
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=commons-collections.git;a=commit;h=77e37dbf238d26351edb29e95391e3df75095d01
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Commit ID the tag points at:
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>    77e37dbf238d26351edb29e95391e3df75095d01
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Site:
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/4.3-RC2/site/index.html
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> The Clirr report is still a problem:
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/4.3-RC2/site/clirr-report.html
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> [The same errors are reported on my machine, so it's
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> not a cache issue...]
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> Regards,
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> Gilles
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Distribution files (committed at revision 31689):
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > >>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Distribution files hashes (SHA256):
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-bin.tar.gz
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > > > >>>
> > 214c12fae27403f1a16ca6c108b5a8682be1a885a0dbbfc8eb30941303e1fe94
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-bin.zip
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > > > >>>
> > 75b51a98fea6fca3746a3f70c6a0be24c99849e4976c4649214eaa5a009d0aeb
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-src.tar.gz
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > > > >>>
> > 399f403feca86dbba7c4162eb90174db45979a2f7db2b3e0ba48240dc43ab434
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-src.zip
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > > > >>>
> > 1c637e260b5b9e372d196593c7617ad3adedb6da3ac9196d086f9fc24401f5c3
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> KEYS file to check signatures:
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>   https://www.apache.org/dist/commons/KEYS
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Maven artifacts:
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1405/
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Please select one of the following options:
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] +1 Release it.
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] +0 Go ahead; I don't care.
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] -0 There are a few minor glitches: ...
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] -1 No, do not release it because ...
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> This vote will be open for at least 72 hours, i.e.
> > > > until
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> 2018-12-29T14:00:00Z
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> (this is UTC time).
> > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > WBR
> > > > > Maxim aka solomax
> > > >
> > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > WBR
> > > Maxim aka solomax
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >
> >

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE][RC2] Commons collections 4.3

Maxim Solodovnik
I'll try to double-check if clirr version was changed
So far I believe the issue is caused by java8 update

Will report back here

On Thu, Jan 17, 2019, 23:39 Gilles Sadowski <[hidden email] wrote:

> Hi.
>
> Le jeu. 17 janv. 2019 à 17:21, Maxim Solodovnik <[hidden email]> a
> écrit :
> >
> > It seems to be "stalemate situation"
> > The test wasn't written for a long period of time
>
> Writing the test would seem to be the best chance.
>
> What is still not clear to me is whether the previous version
> was released with Clirr errors too.
> If yes, then the question might become: Why ask you to fix
> what was broken before?
> If not, then you could look whether the Clirr version was
> changed in the meantime, and if so, run the older versions
> of the tool until the issue disappears.
>
> > And there not enough votes to release :(
>
> That's an ever more recurring issue within "Commons", and
> the PMC does not seem intent on recognizing it. :-/
>
> Regards,
> Gilles
>
> > On Thu, Jan 17, 2019, 22:59 Gilles Sadowski <[hidden email] wrote:
> >
> > > Le jeu. 17 janv. 2019 à 16:17, Maxim Solodovnik <[hidden email]>
> a
> > > écrit :
> > > >
> > > > Actually I don't get what need to be tested :(
> > > > Can you please provide "textual description" of what need to be
> tested?
> > >
> > > Pasted from below:
> > > > > > > > We could also make some definite progress with an actual code
> > > > > > > > example that calls the incriminated methods, compiled
> against the
> > > > > > > > current version of the library and then run against the
> current
> > > RC,
> > > > > > > > and see whether it crashes.
> > >
> > > > Current version works as expected with Java8 application, no issues
> > >
> > > Then: Why a new major version?
> > > It looks like sweeping dust under the carpet. ;-)
> > >
> > > If nobody wants to write a test, then we could just release the current
> > > RC (with a mention that Clirr signals errors that we chose to ignore),
> > > and if someone complains later on (if indeed BC would have been
> broken),
> > > release a bugfix version.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Gilles
> > >
> > > > All current tests are green
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 at 19:14, Gilles Sadowski <[hidden email]>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hello.
> > > > >
> > > > > Le jeu. 17 janv. 2019 à 04:24, Maxim Solodovnik <
> [hidden email]>
> > > a
> > > > > écrit :
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hello All,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Shall I cancel this VOTE and change project coordinates to be
> > > > > > commons-collections5 ?
> > > > >
> > > > > I must have missed part of the thread...  IMO, a major release is
> not
> > > > > the answer to a possible false positive.
> > > > > Did you make the actual test (mentioned somewhere below)?
> > > > >
> > > > > Best regards,
> > > > > Gilles
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Sat, 5 Jan 2019 at 01:04, Amey Jadiye <[hidden email]>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Fri, 4 Jan 2019, 5:25 pm Gilles <
> [hidden email]
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > hi.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi Gilles,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Thu, 3 Jan 2019 22:04:24 +0530, Amey Jadiye wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Hello Maxim / All
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I put little more efforts to find out the possible cause
> of the
> > > > > > > > > error.
> > > > > > > > > In the clirr code, I found the reason for this error and
> same
> > > is
> > > > > > > > > documented
> > > > > > > > > in clirr documentation [1].
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > A method declaration has been added to the specified
> interface.
> > > > > This
> > > > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > > always reported as a binary-compatibility error, but in
> > > practice,
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > changed class might be used successfully with code compiled
> > > against
> > > > > > > > > the old
> > > > > > > > > interface depending upon usage patterns.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Old code which invokes methods upon code compiled against
> the
> > > new
> > > > > > > > > (expanded) interface will continue to work without issues.
> And
> > > old
> > > > > > > > > code
> > > > > > > > > which implements the old version of the interface will also
> > > > > continue
> > > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > work correctly as long as no code attempts to invoke any
> of the
> > > > > > > > > newly-added
> > > > > > > > > methods against that instance. But the code which (validly)
> > > invokes
> > > > > > > > > one of
> > > > > > > > > the new methods in the interface against an object which
> > > implements
> > > > > > > > > only
> > > > > > > > > the old version of the interface will cause an
> > > AbstractMethodError
> > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > be
> > > > > > > > > thrown at the time the method invocation is attempted.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > IIUC, new code that calls the new methods on [Collections]
> > > classes
> > > > > > > > will crash.  Does not look good.
> > > > > > > > On the other hand, Maxim wrote earlier that a method
> reported by
> > > > > > > > Clirr as "new" (cf. below) was in fact present since Java
> 6...
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Are we then sure that it's a Clirr bug?
> > > > > > > > If so, why did you not vote "+1" (on the condition that the
> false
> > > > > > > > positive is mentioned in the release notes)?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > We could also make some definite progress with an actual code
> > > > > > > > example that calls the incriminated methods, compiled
> against the
> > > > > > > > current version of the library and then run against the
> current
> > > RC,
> > > > > > > > and see whether it crashes.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks for directions here, I must also check that. Till then I
> > > would
> > > > > like
> > > > > > > to change my vote to -1 (Non Binding) for this release.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Alternatively, we could instate "revapi" in the POM (and
> disable
> > > > > > > > Clirr); and if the report is clean, trust that (though
> "revapi"
> > > is
> > > > > > > > still beta).
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Opinions?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Gilles
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > In 4.2 and 4.3 looks like we have upgraded the java
> version[2]
> > > > > where
> > > > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > > example for Map interface might have added a few more
> methods
> > > > > causing
> > > > > > > > > these
> > > > > > > > > errors.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > For this release, I am voting 0 (Non-Binding) as there is
> > > unharmed
> > > > > > > > > mess
> > > > > > > > > around the clirr.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > rest of the things are OK with this release, I would
> encourage
> > > to
> > > > > > > > > have
> > > > > > > > > revapi replacing clirr.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > [1]  http://clirr.sourceforge.net/clirr-core/exegesis.html
> > > > > > > > > [2]
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> https://github.com/apache/commons-collections/commit/482762a13f739631f94d03642b0a55a9b7214c44
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > > > > Amey
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jan 3, 2019 at 11:53 AM Amey Jadiye <
> > > [hidden email]>
> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >> I spared little time on finding issue however didn't
> found it
> > > in
> > > > > > > > >> clirr(may
> > > > > > > > >> be hidden somewhere),  today will check if clirr maven
> plugin
> > > have
> > > > > > > > >> any
> > > > > > > > >> issues. also I saw that few other apache commons modules
> > > having
> > > > > same
> > > > > > > > >> issue
> > > > > > > > >> and are released.
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> I also gave try on revapi with commons collection4 4.3RC2.
> > > > > > > > >> revapi:check
> > > > > > > > >> was clean unlike clirr, looks promising to replace clirr.
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> Regards,
> > > > > > > > >> Amey
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> On Wed, 2 Jan 2019, 12:31 pm Maxim Solodovnik <
> > > > > [hidden email]
> > > > > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >>> Hello All,
> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > >>> Just checked clirr report one more time
> > > > > > > > >>> This time I took 1 error and perform investigation:
> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > >>> "Method 'public java.util.Collection values()' has been
> > > added to
> > > > > an
> > > > > > > > >>> interface" org.apache.commons.collections4.BidiMap
> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > >>> In fact I don't understand why this error was reported
> > > > > > > > >>> BidiMap extends java.util.Map
> > > > > > > > >>> Map has method "public java.util.Collection values()" in
> all
> > > > > > > > >>> versions:
> > > > > > > > >>>
> https://docs.oracle.com/javase/6/docs/api/java/util/Map.html
> > > > > > > > >>>
> https://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/api/java/util/Map.html
> > > > > > > > >>>
> https://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/api/java/util/Map.html
> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > >>> Maybe its clirr issue?
> > > > > > > > >>> Would appreciate any help with this investigation
> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > >>> On Mon, 31 Dec 2018 at 16:53, Gilles <
> > > > > [hidden email]>
> > > > > > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >>> >
> > > > > > > > >>> > On Mon, 31 Dec 2018 07:41:40 +0700, Maxim Solodovnik
> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >>> > > Hello Gilles,
> > > > > > > > >>> > >
> > > > > > > > >>> > > I already did analysis: [1], all errors are caused by
> > > > > previous
> > > > > > > > >>> > > release
> > > > > > > > >>> > > 4.3 doesn't introduce any new errors ...
> > > > > > > > >>> > >
> > > > > > > > >>> > > [1] https://markmail.org/message/l7ftxlvdk4yqxijt
> > > > > > > > >>> >
> > > > > > > > >>> > I had seen the post but it says:
> > > > > > > > >>> > ---
> > > > > > > > >>> > these errors are weird. Above classes has no changes
> > > comparing
> > > > > to
> > > > > > > > >>> 4.2
> > > > > > > > >>> > ---
> > > > > > > > >>> >
> > > > > > > > >>> > But IMHO it was not a conclusion: If the cause of the
> > > errors
> > > > > was
> > > > > > > > >>> > identified, it could have been mentioned in the release
> > > notes
> > > > > > > > >>> > and/or the [VOTE] email, in order to avoid further
> > > questioning.
> > > > > > > > >>> >
> > > > > > > > >>> > Is the cause the change of supported JDK?
> > > > > > > > >>> >
> > > > > > > > >>> > Regards,
> > > > > > > > >>> > Gilles
> > > > > > > > >>> >
> > > > > > > > >>> > >
> > > > > > > > >>> > > On Mon, 31 Dec 2018 at 07:26, Rob Tompkins <
> > > > > [hidden email]>
> > > > > > > > >>> > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> I’ll give it a look tonight or in the morning.
> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> -Rob
> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> > On Dec 30, 2018, at 12:25 AM, Maxim Solodovnik
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> > No votes after 3 days :(
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> > Is there anything wrong with the RC?
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> On Thu, 27 Dec 2018 at 05:20, Bruno P. Kinoshita
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> FWIW I had a similar experience, and realized I
> was
> > > doing
> > > > > > > > >>> `git
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> fetch --all`, but it didn't bring the tags. `git
> fetch
> > > > > --tags`
> > > > > > > > >>> did
> > > > > > > > >>> the
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> trick. After that I could `git checkout $tag-name`
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> Cheers
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> Bruno
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> ________________________________
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> From: Gilles <[hidden email]>
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> To: [hidden email]
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> Sent: Thursday, 27 December 2018 9:26 AM
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> Subject: Re: [VOTE][RC2] Commons collections 4.3
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> On Wed, 26 Dec 2018 21:21:34 +0100, Gilles
> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> Hi.
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> On Wed, 26 Dec 2018 20:41:59 +0700, Maxim
> > > Solodovnik
> > > > > > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> This is a [VOTE] for releasing
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Apache Commons collections 4.3
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Tag name:
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>    collections-4.3-RC2 (signature can be
> checked
> > > from
> > > > > git
> > > > > > > > >>> using
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> 'git
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> tag -v')
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> $ git tag -v collections-4.3-RC2
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> error: tag 'collections-4.3-RC2' not found.
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> Although I see it in the link below...
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> What is going on?
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> Issue vanished with a fresh "clone".
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> [Sorry for the noise.]
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> RC1 was cancelled due to some release steps
> were
> > > not
> > > > > done
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Tag URL:
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=commons-collections.git;a=commit;h=77e37dbf238d26351edb29e95391e3df75095d01
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Commit ID the tag points at:
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>    77e37dbf238d26351edb29e95391e3df75095d01
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Site:
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/4.3-RC2/site/index.html
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> The Clirr report is still a problem:
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/4.3-RC2/site/clirr-report.html
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> [The same errors are reported on my machine, so
> it's
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> not a cache issue...]
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> Regards,
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> Gilles
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Distribution files (committed at revision
> 31689):
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Distribution files hashes (SHA256):
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-bin.tar.gz
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > 214c12fae27403f1a16ca6c108b5a8682be1a885a0dbbfc8eb30941303e1fe94
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-bin.zip
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > 75b51a98fea6fca3746a3f70c6a0be24c99849e4976c4649214eaa5a009d0aeb
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-src.tar.gz
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > 399f403feca86dbba7c4162eb90174db45979a2f7db2b3e0ba48240dc43ab434
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-src.zip
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > 1c637e260b5b9e372d196593c7617ad3adedb6da3ac9196d086f9fc24401f5c3
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> KEYS file to check signatures:
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>   https://www.apache.org/dist/commons/KEYS
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Maven artifacts:
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1405/
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Please select one of the following options:
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] +1 Release it.
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] +0 Go ahead; I don't care.
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] -0 There are a few minor glitches: ...
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] -1 No, do not release it because ...
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> This vote will be open for at least 72 hours,
> i.e.
> > > > > until
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> 2018-12-29T14:00:00Z
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> (this is UTC time).
> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > WBR
> > > > > > Maxim aka solomax
> > > > >
> > > > >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > WBR
> > > > Maxim aka solomax
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > >
> > >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE][RC2] Commons collections 4.3

Maxim Solodovnik
OK

I have checked
clirr is the same (comparing to 4.2)

I would appreciate is someone can perform detailed analysis here of one
error (the first one from here [1])

first error is:
Message: "Method 'public java.util.Collection values()' has been added to
an interface"
Class: "org.apache.commons.collections4.BidiMap"
Method/Field: "public java.util.Collection values()"

BidiMap has method "Set<V> values()" since 4.0 (haven't checked earlier
versions),
java.util.Set extends java.util.Collection since java6
The only thing was changed is "@Override" annotation was added

Why is this being reported as error?

[1]
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/4.3-RC2/site/clirr-report.html

On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 at 23:50, Maxim Solodovnik <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I'll try to double-check if clirr version was changed
> So far I believe the issue is caused by java8 update
>
> Will report back here
>
> On Thu, Jan 17, 2019, 23:39 Gilles Sadowski <[hidden email] wrote:
>
>> Hi.
>>
>> Le jeu. 17 janv. 2019 à 17:21, Maxim Solodovnik <[hidden email]> a
>> écrit :
>> >
>> > It seems to be "stalemate situation"
>> > The test wasn't written for a long period of time
>>
>> Writing the test would seem to be the best chance.
>>
>> What is still not clear to me is whether the previous version
>> was released with Clirr errors too.
>> If yes, then the question might become: Why ask you to fix
>> what was broken before?
>> If not, then you could look whether the Clirr version was
>> changed in the meantime, and if so, run the older versions
>> of the tool until the issue disappears.
>>
>> > And there not enough votes to release :(
>>
>> That's an ever more recurring issue within "Commons", and
>> the PMC does not seem intent on recognizing it. :-/
>>
>> Regards,
>> Gilles
>>
>> > On Thu, Jan 17, 2019, 22:59 Gilles Sadowski <[hidden email]
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Le jeu. 17 janv. 2019 à 16:17, Maxim Solodovnik <[hidden email]>
>> a
>> > > écrit :
>> > > >
>> > > > Actually I don't get what need to be tested :(
>> > > > Can you please provide "textual description" of what need to be
>> tested?
>> > >
>> > > Pasted from below:
>> > > > > > > > We could also make some definite progress with an actual
>> code
>> > > > > > > > example that calls the incriminated methods, compiled
>> against the
>> > > > > > > > current version of the library and then run against the
>> current
>> > > RC,
>> > > > > > > > and see whether it crashes.
>> > >
>> > > > Current version works as expected with Java8 application, no issues
>> > >
>> > > Then: Why a new major version?
>> > > It looks like sweeping dust under the carpet. ;-)
>> > >
>> > > If nobody wants to write a test, then we could just release the
>> current
>> > > RC (with a mention that Clirr signals errors that we chose to ignore),
>> > > and if someone complains later on (if indeed BC would have been
>> broken),
>> > > release a bugfix version.
>> > >
>> > > Regards,
>> > > Gilles
>> > >
>> > > > All current tests are green
>> > > >
>> > > > On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 at 19:14, Gilles Sadowski <[hidden email]
>> >
>> > > wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > > Hello.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Le jeu. 17 janv. 2019 à 04:24, Maxim Solodovnik <
>> [hidden email]>
>> > > a
>> > > > > écrit :
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Hello All,
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Shall I cancel this VOTE and change project coordinates to be
>> > > > > > commons-collections5 ?
>> > > > >
>> > > > > I must have missed part of the thread...  IMO, a major release is
>> not
>> > > > > the answer to a possible false positive.
>> > > > > Did you make the actual test (mentioned somewhere below)?
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Best regards,
>> > > > > Gilles
>> > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > On Sat, 5 Jan 2019 at 01:04, Amey Jadiye <[hidden email]>
>> > > wrote:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > > On Fri, 4 Jan 2019, 5:25 pm Gilles <
>> [hidden email]
>> > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > hi.
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > Hi Gilles,
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > On Thu, 3 Jan 2019 22:04:24 +0530, Amey Jadiye wrote:
>> > > > > > > > > Hello Maxim / All
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > I put little more efforts to find out the possible cause
>> of the
>> > > > > > > > > error.
>> > > > > > > > > In the clirr code, I found the reason for this error and
>> same
>> > > is
>> > > > > > > > > documented
>> > > > > > > > > in clirr documentation [1].
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > A method declaration has been added to the specified
>> interface.
>> > > > > This
>> > > > > > > > > is
>> > > > > > > > > always reported as a binary-compatibility error, but in
>> > > practice,
>> > > > > the
>> > > > > > > > > changed class might be used successfully with code
>> compiled
>> > > against
>> > > > > > > > > the old
>> > > > > > > > > interface depending upon usage patterns.
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > Old code which invokes methods upon code compiled against
>> the
>> > > new
>> > > > > > > > > (expanded) interface will continue to work without
>> issues. And
>> > > old
>> > > > > > > > > code
>> > > > > > > > > which implements the old version of the interface will
>> also
>> > > > > continue
>> > > > > > > > > to
>> > > > > > > > > work correctly as long as no code attempts to invoke any
>> of the
>> > > > > > > > > newly-added
>> > > > > > > > > methods against that instance. But the code which
>> (validly)
>> > > invokes
>> > > > > > > > > one of
>> > > > > > > > > the new methods in the interface against an object which
>> > > implements
>> > > > > > > > > only
>> > > > > > > > > the old version of the interface will cause an
>> > > AbstractMethodError
>> > > > > to
>> > > > > > > > > be
>> > > > > > > > > thrown at the time the method invocation is attempted.
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > IIUC, new code that calls the new methods on [Collections]
>> > > classes
>> > > > > > > > will crash.  Does not look good.
>> > > > > > > > On the other hand, Maxim wrote earlier that a method
>> reported by
>> > > > > > > > Clirr as "new" (cf. below) was in fact present since Java
>> 6...
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > Are we then sure that it's a Clirr bug?
>> > > > > > > > If so, why did you not vote "+1" (on the condition that the
>> false
>> > > > > > > > positive is mentioned in the release notes)?
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > We could also make some definite progress with an actual
>> code
>> > > > > > > > example that calls the incriminated methods, compiled
>> against the
>> > > > > > > > current version of the library and then run against the
>> current
>> > > RC,
>> > > > > > > > and see whether it crashes.
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > Thanks for directions here, I must also check that. Till then
>> I
>> > > would
>> > > > > like
>> > > > > > > to change my vote to -1 (Non Binding) for this release.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > Alternatively, we could instate "revapi" in the POM (and
>> disable
>> > > > > > > > Clirr); and if the report is clean, trust that (though
>> "revapi"
>> > > is
>> > > > > > > > still beta).
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > Opinions?
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > Gilles
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > In 4.2 and 4.3 looks like we have upgraded the java
>> version[2]
>> > > > > where
>> > > > > > > > > for
>> > > > > > > > > example for Map interface might have added a few more
>> methods
>> > > > > causing
>> > > > > > > > > these
>> > > > > > > > > errors.
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > For this release, I am voting 0 (Non-Binding) as there is
>> > > unharmed
>> > > > > > > > > mess
>> > > > > > > > > around the clirr.
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > rest of the things are OK with this release, I would
>> encourage
>> > > to
>> > > > > > > > > have
>> > > > > > > > > revapi replacing clirr.
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > [1]
>> http://clirr.sourceforge.net/clirr-core/exegesis.html
>> > > > > > > > > [2]
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > >
>> https://github.com/apache/commons-collections/commit/482762a13f739631f94d03642b0a55a9b7214c44
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > Regards,
>> > > > > > > > > Amey
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jan 3, 2019 at 11:53 AM Amey Jadiye <
>> > > [hidden email]>
>> > > > > > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > >> I spared little time on finding issue however didn't
>> found it
>> > > in
>> > > > > > > > >> clirr(may
>> > > > > > > > >> be hidden somewhere),  today will check if clirr maven
>> plugin
>> > > have
>> > > > > > > > >> any
>> > > > > > > > >> issues. also I saw that few other apache commons modules
>> > > having
>> > > > > same
>> > > > > > > > >> issue
>> > > > > > > > >> and are released.
>> > > > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > > > >> I also gave try on revapi with commons collection4
>> 4.3RC2.
>> > > > > > > > >> revapi:check
>> > > > > > > > >> was clean unlike clirr, looks promising to replace clirr.
>> > > > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > > > >> Regards,
>> > > > > > > > >> Amey
>> > > > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > > > >> On Wed, 2 Jan 2019, 12:31 pm Maxim Solodovnik <
>> > > > > [hidden email]
>> > > > > > > > >> wrote:
>> > > > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > > > >>> Hello All,
>> > > > > > > > >>>
>> > > > > > > > >>> Just checked clirr report one more time
>> > > > > > > > >>> This time I took 1 error and perform investigation:
>> > > > > > > > >>>
>> > > > > > > > >>> "Method 'public java.util.Collection values()' has been
>> > > added to
>> > > > > an
>> > > > > > > > >>> interface" org.apache.commons.collections4.BidiMap
>> > > > > > > > >>>
>> > > > > > > > >>> In fact I don't understand why this error was reported
>> > > > > > > > >>> BidiMap extends java.util.Map
>> > > > > > > > >>> Map has method "public java.util.Collection values()"
>> in all
>> > > > > > > > >>> versions:
>> > > > > > > > >>>
>> https://docs.oracle.com/javase/6/docs/api/java/util/Map.html
>> > > > > > > > >>>
>> https://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/api/java/util/Map.html
>> > > > > > > > >>>
>> https://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/api/java/util/Map.html
>> > > > > > > > >>>
>> > > > > > > > >>> Maybe its clirr issue?
>> > > > > > > > >>> Would appreciate any help with this investigation
>> > > > > > > > >>>
>> > > > > > > > >>> On Mon, 31 Dec 2018 at 16:53, Gilles <
>> > > > > [hidden email]>
>> > > > > > > > >>> wrote:
>> > > > > > > > >>> >
>> > > > > > > > >>> > On Mon, 31 Dec 2018 07:41:40 +0700, Maxim Solodovnik
>> wrote:
>> > > > > > > > >>> > > Hello Gilles,
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >
>> > > > > > > > >>> > > I already did analysis: [1], all errors are caused
>> by
>> > > > > previous
>> > > > > > > > >>> > > release
>> > > > > > > > >>> > > 4.3 doesn't introduce any new errors ...
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >
>> > > > > > > > >>> > > [1] https://markmail.org/message/l7ftxlvdk4yqxijt
>> > > > > > > > >>> >
>> > > > > > > > >>> > I had seen the post but it says:
>> > > > > > > > >>> > ---
>> > > > > > > > >>> > these errors are weird. Above classes has no changes
>> > > comparing
>> > > > > to
>> > > > > > > > >>> 4.2
>> > > > > > > > >>> > ---
>> > > > > > > > >>> >
>> > > > > > > > >>> > But IMHO it was not a conclusion: If the cause of the
>> > > errors
>> > > > > was
>> > > > > > > > >>> > identified, it could have been mentioned in the
>> release
>> > > notes
>> > > > > > > > >>> > and/or the [VOTE] email, in order to avoid further
>> > > questioning.
>> > > > > > > > >>> >
>> > > > > > > > >>> > Is the cause the change of supported JDK?
>> > > > > > > > >>> >
>> > > > > > > > >>> > Regards,
>> > > > > > > > >>> > Gilles
>> > > > > > > > >>> >
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >
>> > > > > > > > >>> > > On Mon, 31 Dec 2018 at 07:26, Rob Tompkins <
>> > > > > [hidden email]>
>> > > > > > > > >>> > > wrote:
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> I’ll give it a look tonight or in the morning.
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> -Rob
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> > On Dec 30, 2018, at 12:25 AM, Maxim Solodovnik
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> > No votes after 3 days :(
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> > Is there anything wrong with the RC?
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> On Thu, 27 Dec 2018 at 05:20, Bruno P. Kinoshita
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> FWIW I had a similar experience, and realized I
>> was
>> > > doing
>> > > > > > > > >>> `git
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> fetch --all`, but it didn't bring the tags. `git
>> fetch
>> > > > > --tags`
>> > > > > > > > >>> did
>> > > > > > > > >>> the
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> trick. After that I could `git checkout $tag-name`
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> Cheers
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> Bruno
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> ________________________________
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> From: Gilles <[hidden email]>
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> To: [hidden email]
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> Sent: Thursday, 27 December 2018 9:26 AM
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> Subject: Re: [VOTE][RC2] Commons collections 4.3
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> On Wed, 26 Dec 2018 21:21:34 +0100, Gilles
>> wrote:
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> Hi.
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> On Wed, 26 Dec 2018 20:41:59 +0700, Maxim
>> > > Solodovnik
>> > > > > > > > >>> wrote:
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> This is a [VOTE] for releasing
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Apache Commons collections 4.3
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Tag name:
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>    collections-4.3-RC2 (signature can be
>> checked
>> > > from
>> > > > > git
>> > > > > > > > >>> using
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> 'git
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> tag -v')
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> $ git tag -v collections-4.3-RC2
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> error: tag 'collections-4.3-RC2' not found.
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> Although I see it in the link below...
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> What is going on?
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> Issue vanished with a fresh "clone".
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> [Sorry for the noise.]
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> RC1 was cancelled due to some release steps
>> were
>> > > not
>> > > > > done
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Tag URL:
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
>> > > > > > > > >>>
>> > > > > > > > >>>
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > >
>> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=commons-collections.git;a=commit;h=77e37dbf238d26351edb29e95391e3df75095d01
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Commit ID the tag points at:
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>    77e37dbf238d26351edb29e95391e3df75095d01
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Site:
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
>> > > > > > > > >>>
>> > > > > > > > >>>
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > >
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/4.3-RC2/site/index.html
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> The Clirr report is still a problem:
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
>> > > > > > > > >>>
>> > > > > > > > >>>
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > >
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/4.3-RC2/site/clirr-report.html
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> [The same errors are reported on my machine,
>> so it's
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> not a cache issue...]
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> Regards,
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> Gilles
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Distribution files (committed at revision
>> 31689):
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
>> > > > > > > > >>>
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Distribution files hashes (SHA256):
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-bin.tar.gz
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
>> > > > > > > > >>>
>> > > 214c12fae27403f1a16ca6c108b5a8682be1a885a0dbbfc8eb30941303e1fe94
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-bin.zip
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
>> > > > > > > > >>>
>> > > 75b51a98fea6fca3746a3f70c6a0be24c99849e4976c4649214eaa5a009d0aeb
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-src.tar.gz
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
>> > > > > > > > >>>
>> > > 399f403feca86dbba7c4162eb90174db45979a2f7db2b3e0ba48240dc43ab434
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-src.zip
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
>> > > > > > > > >>>
>> > > 1c637e260b5b9e372d196593c7617ad3adedb6da3ac9196d086f9fc24401f5c3
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> KEYS file to check signatures:
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>   https://www.apache.org/dist/commons/KEYS
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Maven artifacts:
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
>> > > > > > > > >>>
>> > > > > > > > >>>
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > >
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1405/
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Please select one of the following options:
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] +1 Release it.
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] +0 Go ahead; I don't care.
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] -0 There are a few minor glitches: ...
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] -1 No, do not release it because ...
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> This vote will be open for at least 72 hours,
>> i.e.
>> > > > > until
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> 2018-12-29T14:00:00Z
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> (this is UTC time).
>> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>> > > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail:
>> [hidden email]
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > --
>> > > > > > WBR
>> > > > > > Maxim aka solomax
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>> > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > --
>> > > > WBR
>> > > > Maxim aka solomax
>> > >
>> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>> > > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>> > >
>> > >
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>
>>

--
WBR
Maxim aka solomax
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE][RC2] Commons collections 4.3

garydgregory
On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 10:20 AM Maxim Solodovnik <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> OK
>
> I have checked
> clirr is the same (comparing to 4.2)
>
> I would appreciate is someone can perform detailed analysis here of one
> error (the first one from here [1])
>
> first error is:
> Message: "Method 'public java.util.Collection values()' has been added to
> an interface"
> Class: "org.apache.commons.collections4.BidiMap"
> Method/Field: "public java.util.Collection values()"
>
> BidiMap has method "Set<V> values()" since 4.0 (haven't checked earlier
> versions),
> java.util.Set extends java.util.Collection since java6
> The only thing was changed is "@Override" annotation was added
>
> Why is this being reported as error?
>

Keep in mind that Clirr is very old and not aware of Java 8 features like
default methods, which Clirr reports as errors. I am not sure how much
better japicmp is...

Gary

>
> [1]
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/4.3-RC2/site/clirr-report.html
>
> On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 at 23:50, Maxim Solodovnik <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > I'll try to double-check if clirr version was changed
> > So far I believe the issue is caused by java8 update
> >
> > Will report back here
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 17, 2019, 23:39 Gilles Sadowski <[hidden email] wrote:
> >
> >> Hi.
> >>
> >> Le jeu. 17 janv. 2019 à 17:21, Maxim Solodovnik <[hidden email]>
> a
> >> écrit :
> >> >
> >> > It seems to be "stalemate situation"
> >> > The test wasn't written for a long period of time
> >>
> >> Writing the test would seem to be the best chance.
> >>
> >> What is still not clear to me is whether the previous version
> >> was released with Clirr errors too.
> >> If yes, then the question might become: Why ask you to fix
> >> what was broken before?
> >> If not, then you could look whether the Clirr version was
> >> changed in the meantime, and if so, run the older versions
> >> of the tool until the issue disappears.
> >>
> >> > And there not enough votes to release :(
> >>
> >> That's an ever more recurring issue within "Commons", and
> >> the PMC does not seem intent on recognizing it. :-/
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Gilles
> >>
> >> > On Thu, Jan 17, 2019, 22:59 Gilles Sadowski <[hidden email]
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > Le jeu. 17 janv. 2019 à 16:17, Maxim Solodovnik <
> [hidden email]>
> >> a
> >> > > écrit :
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Actually I don't get what need to be tested :(
> >> > > > Can you please provide "textual description" of what need to be
> >> tested?
> >> > >
> >> > > Pasted from below:
> >> > > > > > > > We could also make some definite progress with an actual
> >> code
> >> > > > > > > > example that calls the incriminated methods, compiled
> >> against the
> >> > > > > > > > current version of the library and then run against the
> >> current
> >> > > RC,
> >> > > > > > > > and see whether it crashes.
> >> > >
> >> > > > Current version works as expected with Java8 application, no
> issues
> >> > >
> >> > > Then: Why a new major version?
> >> > > It looks like sweeping dust under the carpet. ;-)
> >> > >
> >> > > If nobody wants to write a test, then we could just release the
> >> current
> >> > > RC (with a mention that Clirr signals errors that we chose to
> ignore),
> >> > > and if someone complains later on (if indeed BC would have been
> >> broken),
> >> > > release a bugfix version.
> >> > >
> >> > > Regards,
> >> > > Gilles
> >> > >
> >> > > > All current tests are green
> >> > > >
> >> > > > On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 at 19:14, Gilles Sadowski <
> [hidden email]
> >> >
> >> > > wrote:
> >> > > >
> >> > > > > Hello.
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > Le jeu. 17 janv. 2019 à 04:24, Maxim Solodovnik <
> >> [hidden email]>
> >> > > a
> >> > > > > écrit :
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > Hello All,
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > Shall I cancel this VOTE and change project coordinates to be
> >> > > > > > commons-collections5 ?
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > I must have missed part of the thread...  IMO, a major release
> is
> >> not
> >> > > > > the answer to a possible false positive.
> >> > > > > Did you make the actual test (mentioned somewhere below)?
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > Best regards,
> >> > > > > Gilles
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > On Sat, 5 Jan 2019 at 01:04, Amey Jadiye <
> [hidden email]>
> >> > > wrote:
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > On Fri, 4 Jan 2019, 5:25 pm Gilles <
> >> [hidden email]
> >> > > > > wrote:
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > hi.
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > Hi Gilles,
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > On Thu, 3 Jan 2019 22:04:24 +0530, Amey Jadiye wrote:
> >> > > > > > > > > Hello Maxim / All
> >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > I put little more efforts to find out the possible cause
> >> of the
> >> > > > > > > > > error.
> >> > > > > > > > > In the clirr code, I found the reason for this error and
> >> same
> >> > > is
> >> > > > > > > > > documented
> >> > > > > > > > > in clirr documentation [1].
> >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > A method declaration has been added to the specified
> >> interface.
> >> > > > > This
> >> > > > > > > > > is
> >> > > > > > > > > always reported as a binary-compatibility error, but in
> >> > > practice,
> >> > > > > the
> >> > > > > > > > > changed class might be used successfully with code
> >> compiled
> >> > > against
> >> > > > > > > > > the old
> >> > > > > > > > > interface depending upon usage patterns.
> >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > Old code which invokes methods upon code compiled
> against
> >> the
> >> > > new
> >> > > > > > > > > (expanded) interface will continue to work without
> >> issues. And
> >> > > old
> >> > > > > > > > > code
> >> > > > > > > > > which implements the old version of the interface will
> >> also
> >> > > > > continue
> >> > > > > > > > > to
> >> > > > > > > > > work correctly as long as no code attempts to invoke any
> >> of the
> >> > > > > > > > > newly-added
> >> > > > > > > > > methods against that instance. But the code which
> >> (validly)
> >> > > invokes
> >> > > > > > > > > one of
> >> > > > > > > > > the new methods in the interface against an object which
> >> > > implements
> >> > > > > > > > > only
> >> > > > > > > > > the old version of the interface will cause an
> >> > > AbstractMethodError
> >> > > > > to
> >> > > > > > > > > be
> >> > > > > > > > > thrown at the time the method invocation is attempted.
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > IIUC, new code that calls the new methods on [Collections]
> >> > > classes
> >> > > > > > > > will crash.  Does not look good.
> >> > > > > > > > On the other hand, Maxim wrote earlier that a method
> >> reported by
> >> > > > > > > > Clirr as "new" (cf. below) was in fact present since Java
> >> 6...
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > Are we then sure that it's a Clirr bug?
> >> > > > > > > > If so, why did you not vote "+1" (on the condition that
> the
> >> false
> >> > > > > > > > positive is mentioned in the release notes)?
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > We could also make some definite progress with an actual
> >> code
> >> > > > > > > > example that calls the incriminated methods, compiled
> >> against the
> >> > > > > > > > current version of the library and then run against the
> >> current
> >> > > RC,
> >> > > > > > > > and see whether it crashes.
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > Thanks for directions here, I must also check that. Till
> then
> >> I
> >> > > would
> >> > > > > like
> >> > > > > > > to change my vote to -1 (Non Binding) for this release.
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > Alternatively, we could instate "revapi" in the POM (and
> >> disable
> >> > > > > > > > Clirr); and if the report is clean, trust that (though
> >> "revapi"
> >> > > is
> >> > > > > > > > still beta).
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > Opinions?
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > Gilles
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > In 4.2 and 4.3 looks like we have upgraded the java
> >> version[2]
> >> > > > > where
> >> > > > > > > > > for
> >> > > > > > > > > example for Map interface might have added a few more
> >> methods
> >> > > > > causing
> >> > > > > > > > > these
> >> > > > > > > > > errors.
> >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > For this release, I am voting 0 (Non-Binding) as there
> is
> >> > > unharmed
> >> > > > > > > > > mess
> >> > > > > > > > > around the clirr.
> >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > rest of the things are OK with this release, I would
> >> encourage
> >> > > to
> >> > > > > > > > > have
> >> > > > > > > > > revapi replacing clirr.
> >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > [1]
> >> http://clirr.sourceforge.net/clirr-core/exegesis.html
> >> > > > > > > > > [2]
> >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > >
> >>
> https://github.com/apache/commons-collections/commit/482762a13f739631f94d03642b0a55a9b7214c44
> >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > Regards,
> >> > > > > > > > > Amey
> >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jan 3, 2019 at 11:53 AM Amey Jadiye <
> >> > > [hidden email]>
> >> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > >> I spared little time on finding issue however didn't
> >> found it
> >> > > in
> >> > > > > > > > >> clirr(may
> >> > > > > > > > >> be hidden somewhere),  today will check if clirr maven
> >> plugin
> >> > > have
> >> > > > > > > > >> any
> >> > > > > > > > >> issues. also I saw that few other apache commons
> modules
> >> > > having
> >> > > > > same
> >> > > > > > > > >> issue
> >> > > > > > > > >> and are released.
> >> > > > > > > > >>
> >> > > > > > > > >> I also gave try on revapi with commons collection4
> >> 4.3RC2.
> >> > > > > > > > >> revapi:check
> >> > > > > > > > >> was clean unlike clirr, looks promising to replace
> clirr.
> >> > > > > > > > >>
> >> > > > > > > > >> Regards,
> >> > > > > > > > >> Amey
> >> > > > > > > > >>
> >> > > > > > > > >> On Wed, 2 Jan 2019, 12:31 pm Maxim Solodovnik <
> >> > > > > [hidden email]
> >> > > > > > > > >> wrote:
> >> > > > > > > > >>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> Hello All,
> >> > > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> Just checked clirr report one more time
> >> > > > > > > > >>> This time I took 1 error and perform investigation:
> >> > > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> "Method 'public java.util.Collection values()' has
> been
> >> > > added to
> >> > > > > an
> >> > > > > > > > >>> interface" org.apache.commons.collections4.BidiMap
> >> > > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> In fact I don't understand why this error was reported
> >> > > > > > > > >>> BidiMap extends java.util.Map
> >> > > > > > > > >>> Map has method "public java.util.Collection values()"
> >> in all
> >> > > > > > > > >>> versions:
> >> > > > > > > > >>>
> >> https://docs.oracle.com/javase/6/docs/api/java/util/Map.html
> >> > > > > > > > >>>
> >> https://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/api/java/util/Map.html
> >> > > > > > > > >>>
> >> https://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/api/java/util/Map.html
> >> > > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> Maybe its clirr issue?
> >> > > > > > > > >>> Would appreciate any help with this investigation
> >> > > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> On Mon, 31 Dec 2018 at 16:53, Gilles <
> >> > > > > [hidden email]>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> wrote:
> >> > > > > > > > >>> >
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > On Mon, 31 Dec 2018 07:41:40 +0700, Maxim Solodovnik
> >> wrote:
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > > Hello Gilles,
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > > I already did analysis: [1], all errors are caused
> >> by
> >> > > > > previous
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > > release
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > > 4.3 doesn't introduce any new errors ...
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > > [1] https://markmail.org/message/l7ftxlvdk4yqxijt
> >> > > > > > > > >>> >
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > I had seen the post but it says:
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > ---
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > these errors are weird. Above classes has no changes
> >> > > comparing
> >> > > > > to
> >> > > > > > > > >>> 4.2
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > ---
> >> > > > > > > > >>> >
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > But IMHO it was not a conclusion: If the cause of
> the
> >> > > errors
> >> > > > > was
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > identified, it could have been mentioned in the
> >> release
> >> > > notes
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > and/or the [VOTE] email, in order to avoid further
> >> > > questioning.
> >> > > > > > > > >>> >
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > Is the cause the change of supported JDK?
> >> > > > > > > > >>> >
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > Regards,
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > Gilles
> >> > > > > > > > >>> >
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > > On Mon, 31 Dec 2018 at 07:26, Rob Tompkins <
> >> > > > > [hidden email]>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > > wrote:
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> I’ll give it a look tonight or in the morning.
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> -Rob
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> > On Dec 30, 2018, at 12:25 AM, Maxim Solodovnik
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> > No votes after 3 days :(
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> > Is there anything wrong with the RC?
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> On Thu, 27 Dec 2018 at 05:20, Bruno P.
> Kinoshita
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> FWIW I had a similar experience, and realized
> I
> >> was
> >> > > doing
> >> > > > > > > > >>> `git
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> fetch --all`, but it didn't bring the tags. `git
> >> fetch
> >> > > > > --tags`
> >> > > > > > > > >>> did
> >> > > > > > > > >>> the
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> trick. After that I could `git checkout
> $tag-name`
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> Cheers
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> Bruno
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> ________________________________
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> From: Gilles <[hidden email]>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> To: [hidden email]
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> Sent: Thursday, 27 December 2018 9:26 AM
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> Subject: Re: [VOTE][RC2] Commons collections
> 4.3
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> On Wed, 26 Dec 2018 21:21:34 +0100, Gilles
> >> wrote:
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> Hi.
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> On Wed, 26 Dec 2018 20:41:59 +0700, Maxim
> >> > > Solodovnik
> >> > > > > > > > >>> wrote:
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> This is a [VOTE] for releasing
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Apache Commons collections 4.3
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Tag name:
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>    collections-4.3-RC2 (signature can be
> >> checked
> >> > > from
> >> > > > > git
> >> > > > > > > > >>> using
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> 'git
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> tag -v')
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> $ git tag -v collections-4.3-RC2
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> error: tag 'collections-4.3-RC2' not found.
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> Although I see it in the link below...
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> What is going on?
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> Issue vanished with a fresh "clone".
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> [Sorry for the noise.]
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> RC1 was cancelled due to some release steps
> >> were
> >> > > not
> >> > > > > done
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Tag URL:
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> >> > > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > >
> >>
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=commons-collections.git;a=commit;h=77e37dbf238d26351edb29e95391e3df75095d01
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Commit ID the tag points at:
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>    77e37dbf238d26351edb29e95391e3df75095d01
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Site:
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> >> > > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > >
> >>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/4.3-RC2/site/index.html
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> The Clirr report is still a problem:
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> >> > > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > >
> >>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/4.3-RC2/site/clirr-report.html
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> [The same errors are reported on my machine,
> >> so it's
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> not a cache issue...]
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> Regards,
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> Gilles
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Distribution files (committed at revision
> >> 31689):
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>>
> >> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Distribution files hashes (SHA256):
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-bin.tar.gz
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> >> > > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > 214c12fae27403f1a16ca6c108b5a8682be1a885a0dbbfc8eb30941303e1fe94
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-bin.zip
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> >> > > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > 75b51a98fea6fca3746a3f70c6a0be24c99849e4976c4649214eaa5a009d0aeb
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-src.tar.gz
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> >> > > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > 399f403feca86dbba7c4162eb90174db45979a2f7db2b3e0ba48240dc43ab434
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-src.zip
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> >> > > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > 1c637e260b5b9e372d196593c7617ad3adedb6da3ac9196d086f9fc24401f5c3
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> KEYS file to check signatures:
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>   https://www.apache.org/dist/commons/KEYS
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Maven artifacts:
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> >> > > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > >
> >>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1405/
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Please select one of the following options:
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] +1 Release it.
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] +0 Go ahead; I don't care.
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] -0 There are a few minor glitches: ...
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] -1 No, do not release it because ...
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> This vote will be open for at least 72
> hours,
> >> i.e.
> >> > > > > until
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> 2018-12-29T14:00:00Z
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> (this is UTC time).
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> > > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> [hidden email]
> >> > > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail:
> >> [hidden email]
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > --
> >> > > > > > WBR
> >> > > > > > Maxim aka solomax
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >> > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > --
> >> > > > WBR
> >> > > > Maxim aka solomax
> >> > >
> >> > >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >> > > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >>
> >>
>
> --
> WBR
> Maxim aka solomax
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE][RC2] Commons collections 4.3

sebb-2-2
In reply to this post by Maxim Solodovnik
We don't really know why it is being reported as an error.

But what's important is to understand whether the report is valid or not.

The way to check that is to try it out, as noted else-thread:

---cut here---
We could also make some definite progress with an actual code
example that calls the incriminated methods, compiled against the
current version of the library and then run against the current RC,
and see whether it crashes.
---cut here---

i.e. see what happens if someone updates the library without
recompiling their code.

Once we have established that the Clirr error is a false positive,
this can be noted in the release notes.

S.



On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 at 15:20, Maxim Solodovnik <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> OK
>
> I have checked
> clirr is the same (comparing to 4.2)
>
> I would appreciate is someone can perform detailed analysis here of one
> error (the first one from here [1])
>
> first error is:
> Message: "Method 'public java.util.Collection values()' has been added to
> an interface"
> Class: "org.apache.commons.collections4.BidiMap"
> Method/Field: "public java.util.Collection values()"
>
> BidiMap has method "Set<V> values()" since 4.0 (haven't checked earlier
> versions),
> java.util.Set extends java.util.Collection since java6
> The only thing was changed is "@Override" annotation was added
>
> Why is this being reported as error?
>
> [1]
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/4.3-RC2/site/clirr-report.html
>
> On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 at 23:50, Maxim Solodovnik <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > I'll try to double-check if clirr version was changed
> > So far I believe the issue is caused by java8 update
> >
> > Will report back here
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 17, 2019, 23:39 Gilles Sadowski <[hidden email] wrote:
> >
> >> Hi.
> >>
> >> Le jeu. 17 janv. 2019 à 17:21, Maxim Solodovnik <[hidden email]> a
> >> écrit :
> >> >
> >> > It seems to be "stalemate situation"
> >> > The test wasn't written for a long period of time
> >>
> >> Writing the test would seem to be the best chance.
> >>
> >> What is still not clear to me is whether the previous version
> >> was released with Clirr errors too.
> >> If yes, then the question might become: Why ask you to fix
> >> what was broken before?
> >> If not, then you could look whether the Clirr version was
> >> changed in the meantime, and if so, run the older versions
> >> of the tool until the issue disappears.
> >>
> >> > And there not enough votes to release :(
> >>
> >> That's an ever more recurring issue within "Commons", and
> >> the PMC does not seem intent on recognizing it. :-/
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Gilles
> >>
> >> > On Thu, Jan 17, 2019, 22:59 Gilles Sadowski <[hidden email]
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > Le jeu. 17 janv. 2019 à 16:17, Maxim Solodovnik <[hidden email]>
> >> a
> >> > > écrit :
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Actually I don't get what need to be tested :(
> >> > > > Can you please provide "textual description" of what need to be
> >> tested?
> >> > >
> >> > > Pasted from below:
> >> > > > > > > > We could also make some definite progress with an actual
> >> code
> >> > > > > > > > example that calls the incriminated methods, compiled
> >> against the
> >> > > > > > > > current version of the library and then run against the
> >> current
> >> > > RC,
> >> > > > > > > > and see whether it crashes.
> >> > >
> >> > > > Current version works as expected with Java8 application, no issues
> >> > >
> >> > > Then: Why a new major version?
> >> > > It looks like sweeping dust under the carpet. ;-)
> >> > >
> >> > > If nobody wants to write a test, then we could just release the
> >> current
> >> > > RC (with a mention that Clirr signals errors that we chose to ignore),
> >> > > and if someone complains later on (if indeed BC would have been
> >> broken),
> >> > > release a bugfix version.
> >> > >
> >> > > Regards,
> >> > > Gilles
> >> > >
> >> > > > All current tests are green
> >> > > >
> >> > > > On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 at 19:14, Gilles Sadowski <[hidden email]
> >> >
> >> > > wrote:
> >> > > >
> >> > > > > Hello.
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > Le jeu. 17 janv. 2019 à 04:24, Maxim Solodovnik <
> >> [hidden email]>
> >> > > a
> >> > > > > écrit :
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > Hello All,
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > Shall I cancel this VOTE and change project coordinates to be
> >> > > > > > commons-collections5 ?
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > I must have missed part of the thread...  IMO, a major release is
> >> not
> >> > > > > the answer to a possible false positive.
> >> > > > > Did you make the actual test (mentioned somewhere below)?
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > Best regards,
> >> > > > > Gilles
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > On Sat, 5 Jan 2019 at 01:04, Amey Jadiye <[hidden email]>
> >> > > wrote:
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > On Fri, 4 Jan 2019, 5:25 pm Gilles <
> >> [hidden email]
> >> > > > > wrote:
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > hi.
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > Hi Gilles,
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > On Thu, 3 Jan 2019 22:04:24 +0530, Amey Jadiye wrote:
> >> > > > > > > > > Hello Maxim / All
> >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > I put little more efforts to find out the possible cause
> >> of the
> >> > > > > > > > > error.
> >> > > > > > > > > In the clirr code, I found the reason for this error and
> >> same
> >> > > is
> >> > > > > > > > > documented
> >> > > > > > > > > in clirr documentation [1].
> >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > A method declaration has been added to the specified
> >> interface.
> >> > > > > This
> >> > > > > > > > > is
> >> > > > > > > > > always reported as a binary-compatibility error, but in
> >> > > practice,
> >> > > > > the
> >> > > > > > > > > changed class might be used successfully with code
> >> compiled
> >> > > against
> >> > > > > > > > > the old
> >> > > > > > > > > interface depending upon usage patterns.
> >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > Old code which invokes methods upon code compiled against
> >> the
> >> > > new
> >> > > > > > > > > (expanded) interface will continue to work without
> >> issues. And
> >> > > old
> >> > > > > > > > > code
> >> > > > > > > > > which implements the old version of the interface will
> >> also
> >> > > > > continue
> >> > > > > > > > > to
> >> > > > > > > > > work correctly as long as no code attempts to invoke any
> >> of the
> >> > > > > > > > > newly-added
> >> > > > > > > > > methods against that instance. But the code which
> >> (validly)
> >> > > invokes
> >> > > > > > > > > one of
> >> > > > > > > > > the new methods in the interface against an object which
> >> > > implements
> >> > > > > > > > > only
> >> > > > > > > > > the old version of the interface will cause an
> >> > > AbstractMethodError
> >> > > > > to
> >> > > > > > > > > be
> >> > > > > > > > > thrown at the time the method invocation is attempted.
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > IIUC, new code that calls the new methods on [Collections]
> >> > > classes
> >> > > > > > > > will crash.  Does not look good.
> >> > > > > > > > On the other hand, Maxim wrote earlier that a method
> >> reported by
> >> > > > > > > > Clirr as "new" (cf. below) was in fact present since Java
> >> 6...
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > Are we then sure that it's a Clirr bug?
> >> > > > > > > > If so, why did you not vote "+1" (on the condition that the
> >> false
> >> > > > > > > > positive is mentioned in the release notes)?
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > We could also make some definite progress with an actual
> >> code
> >> > > > > > > > example that calls the incriminated methods, compiled
> >> against the
> >> > > > > > > > current version of the library and then run against the
> >> current
> >> > > RC,
> >> > > > > > > > and see whether it crashes.
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > Thanks for directions here, I must also check that. Till then
> >> I
> >> > > would
> >> > > > > like
> >> > > > > > > to change my vote to -1 (Non Binding) for this release.
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > Alternatively, we could instate "revapi" in the POM (and
> >> disable
> >> > > > > > > > Clirr); and if the report is clean, trust that (though
> >> "revapi"
> >> > > is
> >> > > > > > > > still beta).
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > Opinions?
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > Gilles
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > In 4.2 and 4.3 looks like we have upgraded the java
> >> version[2]
> >> > > > > where
> >> > > > > > > > > for
> >> > > > > > > > > example for Map interface might have added a few more
> >> methods
> >> > > > > causing
> >> > > > > > > > > these
> >> > > > > > > > > errors.
> >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > For this release, I am voting 0 (Non-Binding) as there is
> >> > > unharmed
> >> > > > > > > > > mess
> >> > > > > > > > > around the clirr.
> >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > rest of the things are OK with this release, I would
> >> encourage
> >> > > to
> >> > > > > > > > > have
> >> > > > > > > > > revapi replacing clirr.
> >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > [1]
> >> http://clirr.sourceforge.net/clirr-core/exegesis.html
> >> > > > > > > > > [2]
> >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > >
> >> https://github.com/apache/commons-collections/commit/482762a13f739631f94d03642b0a55a9b7214c44
> >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > Regards,
> >> > > > > > > > > Amey
> >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jan 3, 2019 at 11:53 AM Amey Jadiye <
> >> > > [hidden email]>
> >> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > >> I spared little time on finding issue however didn't
> >> found it
> >> > > in
> >> > > > > > > > >> clirr(may
> >> > > > > > > > >> be hidden somewhere),  today will check if clirr maven
> >> plugin
> >> > > have
> >> > > > > > > > >> any
> >> > > > > > > > >> issues. also I saw that few other apache commons modules
> >> > > having
> >> > > > > same
> >> > > > > > > > >> issue
> >> > > > > > > > >> and are released.
> >> > > > > > > > >>
> >> > > > > > > > >> I also gave try on revapi with commons collection4
> >> 4.3RC2.
> >> > > > > > > > >> revapi:check
> >> > > > > > > > >> was clean unlike clirr, looks promising to replace clirr.
> >> > > > > > > > >>
> >> > > > > > > > >> Regards,
> >> > > > > > > > >> Amey
> >> > > > > > > > >>
> >> > > > > > > > >> On Wed, 2 Jan 2019, 12:31 pm Maxim Solodovnik <
> >> > > > > [hidden email]
> >> > > > > > > > >> wrote:
> >> > > > > > > > >>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> Hello All,
> >> > > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> Just checked clirr report one more time
> >> > > > > > > > >>> This time I took 1 error and perform investigation:
> >> > > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> "Method 'public java.util.Collection values()' has been
> >> > > added to
> >> > > > > an
> >> > > > > > > > >>> interface" org.apache.commons.collections4.BidiMap
> >> > > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> In fact I don't understand why this error was reported
> >> > > > > > > > >>> BidiMap extends java.util.Map
> >> > > > > > > > >>> Map has method "public java.util.Collection values()"
> >> in all
> >> > > > > > > > >>> versions:
> >> > > > > > > > >>>
> >> https://docs.oracle.com/javase/6/docs/api/java/util/Map.html
> >> > > > > > > > >>>
> >> https://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/api/java/util/Map.html
> >> > > > > > > > >>>
> >> https://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/api/java/util/Map.html
> >> > > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> Maybe its clirr issue?
> >> > > > > > > > >>> Would appreciate any help with this investigation
> >> > > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> On Mon, 31 Dec 2018 at 16:53, Gilles <
> >> > > > > [hidden email]>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> wrote:
> >> > > > > > > > >>> >
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > On Mon, 31 Dec 2018 07:41:40 +0700, Maxim Solodovnik
> >> wrote:
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > > Hello Gilles,
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > > I already did analysis: [1], all errors are caused
> >> by
> >> > > > > previous
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > > release
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > > 4.3 doesn't introduce any new errors ...
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > > [1] https://markmail.org/message/l7ftxlvdk4yqxijt
> >> > > > > > > > >>> >
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > I had seen the post but it says:
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > ---
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > these errors are weird. Above classes has no changes
> >> > > comparing
> >> > > > > to
> >> > > > > > > > >>> 4.2
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > ---
> >> > > > > > > > >>> >
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > But IMHO it was not a conclusion: If the cause of the
> >> > > errors
> >> > > > > was
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > identified, it could have been mentioned in the
> >> release
> >> > > notes
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > and/or the [VOTE] email, in order to avoid further
> >> > > questioning.
> >> > > > > > > > >>> >
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > Is the cause the change of supported JDK?
> >> > > > > > > > >>> >
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > Regards,
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > Gilles
> >> > > > > > > > >>> >
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > > On Mon, 31 Dec 2018 at 07:26, Rob Tompkins <
> >> > > > > [hidden email]>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > > wrote:
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> I’ll give it a look tonight or in the morning.
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> -Rob
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> > On Dec 30, 2018, at 12:25 AM, Maxim Solodovnik
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> > No votes after 3 days :(
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> > Is there anything wrong with the RC?
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> On Thu, 27 Dec 2018 at 05:20, Bruno P. Kinoshita
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> FWIW I had a similar experience, and realized I
> >> was
> >> > > doing
> >> > > > > > > > >>> `git
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> fetch --all`, but it didn't bring the tags. `git
> >> fetch
> >> > > > > --tags`
> >> > > > > > > > >>> did
> >> > > > > > > > >>> the
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> trick. After that I could `git checkout $tag-name`
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> Cheers
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> Bruno
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> ________________________________
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> From: Gilles <[hidden email]>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> To: [hidden email]
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> Sent: Thursday, 27 December 2018 9:26 AM
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> Subject: Re: [VOTE][RC2] Commons collections 4.3
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> On Wed, 26 Dec 2018 21:21:34 +0100, Gilles
> >> wrote:
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> Hi.
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> On Wed, 26 Dec 2018 20:41:59 +0700, Maxim
> >> > > Solodovnik
> >> > > > > > > > >>> wrote:
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> This is a [VOTE] for releasing
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Apache Commons collections 4.3
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Tag name:
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>    collections-4.3-RC2 (signature can be
> >> checked
> >> > > from
> >> > > > > git
> >> > > > > > > > >>> using
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> 'git
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> tag -v')
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> $ git tag -v collections-4.3-RC2
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> error: tag 'collections-4.3-RC2' not found.
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> Although I see it in the link below...
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> What is going on?
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> Issue vanished with a fresh "clone".
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> [Sorry for the noise.]
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> RC1 was cancelled due to some release steps
> >> were
> >> > > not
> >> > > > > done
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Tag URL:
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> >> > > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > >
> >> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=commons-collections.git;a=commit;h=77e37dbf238d26351edb29e95391e3df75095d01
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Commit ID the tag points at:
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>    77e37dbf238d26351edb29e95391e3df75095d01
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Site:
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> >> > > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > >
> >> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/4.3-RC2/site/index.html
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> The Clirr report is still a problem:
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> >> > > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > >
> >> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/4.3-RC2/site/clirr-report.html
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> [The same errors are reported on my machine,
> >> so it's
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> not a cache issue...]
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> Regards,
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> Gilles
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Distribution files (committed at revision
> >> 31689):
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>>
> >> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Distribution files hashes (SHA256):
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-bin.tar.gz
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> >> > > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > 214c12fae27403f1a16ca6c108b5a8682be1a885a0dbbfc8eb30941303e1fe94
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-bin.zip
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> >> > > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > 75b51a98fea6fca3746a3f70c6a0be24c99849e4976c4649214eaa5a009d0aeb
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-src.tar.gz
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> >> > > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > 399f403feca86dbba7c4162eb90174db45979a2f7db2b3e0ba48240dc43ab434
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-src.zip
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> >> > > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > 1c637e260b5b9e372d196593c7617ad3adedb6da3ac9196d086f9fc24401f5c3
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> KEYS file to check signatures:
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>   https://www.apache.org/dist/commons/KEYS
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Maven artifacts:
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> >> > > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > >
> >> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1405/
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Please select one of the following options:
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] +1 Release it.
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] +0 Go ahead; I don't care.
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] -0 There are a few minor glitches: ...
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] -1 No, do not release it because ...
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> This vote will be open for at least 72 hours,
> >> i.e.
> >> > > > > until
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> 2018-12-29T14:00:00Z
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> (this is UTC time).
> >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> > > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >> > > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail:
> >> [hidden email]
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > --
> >> > > > > > WBR
> >> > > > > > Maxim aka solomax
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >> > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > --
> >> > > > WBR
> >> > > > Maxim aka solomax
> >> > >
> >> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >> > > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >>
> >>
>
> --
> WBR
> Maxim aka solomax

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE][RC2] Commons collections 4.3

Maxim Solodovnik
OK

here is the test:
https://gist.github.com/solomax/a6fbec6db71bb28dfe53afc566086505
It was compiled using

java version "1.8.0_201"
Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.8.0_201-b09)
Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM (build 25.201-b09, mixed mode)

`javac -cp
~/.m2/repository/org/apache/commons/commons-collections4/4.2/commons-collections4-4.2.jar
src/org/tmp/Test.java`

It was run with
1) `java -cp
~/.m2/repository/org/apache/commons/commons-collections4/4.2/commons-collections4-4.2.jar:src/
org.tmp.Test`
2) `java -cp
~/.m2/repository/org/apache/commons/commons-collections4/4.3/commons-collections4-4.3.jar:src/
org.tmp.Test `

no crash

ps this is the first time I need to write java tests during release process
....

On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 at 22:37, sebb <[hidden email]> wrote:

> We don't really know why it is being reported as an error.
>
> But what's important is to understand whether the report is valid or not.
>
> The way to check that is to try it out, as noted else-thread:
>
> ---cut here---
> We could also make some definite progress with an actual code
> example that calls the incriminated methods, compiled against the
> current version of the library and then run against the current RC,
> and see whether it crashes.
> ---cut here---
>
> i.e. see what happens if someone updates the library without
> recompiling their code.
>
> Once we have established that the Clirr error is a false positive,
> this can be noted in the release notes.
>
> S.
>
>
>
> On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 at 15:20, Maxim Solodovnik <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> >
> > OK
> >
> > I have checked
> > clirr is the same (comparing to 4.2)
> >
> > I would appreciate is someone can perform detailed analysis here of one
> > error (the first one from here [1])
> >
> > first error is:
> > Message: "Method 'public java.util.Collection values()' has been added to
> > an interface"
> > Class: "org.apache.commons.collections4.BidiMap"
> > Method/Field: "public java.util.Collection values()"
> >
> > BidiMap has method "Set<V> values()" since 4.0 (haven't checked earlier
> > versions),
> > java.util.Set extends java.util.Collection since java6
> > The only thing was changed is "@Override" annotation was added
> >
> > Why is this being reported as error?
> >
> > [1]
> >
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/4.3-RC2/site/clirr-report.html
> >
> > On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 at 23:50, Maxim Solodovnik <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> >
> > > I'll try to double-check if clirr version was changed
> > > So far I believe the issue is caused by java8 update
> > >
> > > Will report back here
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jan 17, 2019, 23:39 Gilles Sadowski <[hidden email]
> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Hi.
> > >>
> > >> Le jeu. 17 janv. 2019 à 17:21, Maxim Solodovnik <[hidden email]>
> a
> > >> écrit :
> > >> >
> > >> > It seems to be "stalemate situation"
> > >> > The test wasn't written for a long period of time
> > >>
> > >> Writing the test would seem to be the best chance.
> > >>
> > >> What is still not clear to me is whether the previous version
> > >> was released with Clirr errors too.
> > >> If yes, then the question might become: Why ask you to fix
> > >> what was broken before?
> > >> If not, then you could look whether the Clirr version was
> > >> changed in the meantime, and if so, run the older versions
> > >> of the tool until the issue disappears.
> > >>
> > >> > And there not enough votes to release :(
> > >>
> > >> That's an ever more recurring issue within "Commons", and
> > >> the PMC does not seem intent on recognizing it. :-/
> > >>
> > >> Regards,
> > >> Gilles
> > >>
> > >> > On Thu, Jan 17, 2019, 22:59 Gilles Sadowski <[hidden email]
> > >> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > > Le jeu. 17 janv. 2019 à 16:17, Maxim Solodovnik <
> [hidden email]>
> > >> a
> > >> > > écrit :
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > Actually I don't get what need to be tested :(
> > >> > > > Can you please provide "textual description" of what need to be
> > >> tested?
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Pasted from below:
> > >> > > > > > > > We could also make some definite progress with an actual
> > >> code
> > >> > > > > > > > example that calls the incriminated methods, compiled
> > >> against the
> > >> > > > > > > > current version of the library and then run against the
> > >> current
> > >> > > RC,
> > >> > > > > > > > and see whether it crashes.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > > Current version works as expected with Java8 application, no
> issues
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Then: Why a new major version?
> > >> > > It looks like sweeping dust under the carpet. ;-)
> > >> > >
> > >> > > If nobody wants to write a test, then we could just release the
> > >> current
> > >> > > RC (with a mention that Clirr signals errors that we chose to
> ignore),
> > >> > > and if someone complains later on (if indeed BC would have been
> > >> broken),
> > >> > > release a bugfix version.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Regards,
> > >> > > Gilles
> > >> > >
> > >> > > > All current tests are green
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 at 19:14, Gilles Sadowski <
> [hidden email]
> > >> >
> > >> > > wrote:
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > > Hello.
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Le jeu. 17 janv. 2019 à 04:24, Maxim Solodovnik <
> > >> [hidden email]>
> > >> > > a
> > >> > > > > écrit :
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > Hello All,
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > Shall I cancel this VOTE and change project coordinates to
> be
> > >> > > > > > commons-collections5 ?
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > I must have missed part of the thread...  IMO, a major
> release is
> > >> not
> > >> > > > > the answer to a possible false positive.
> > >> > > > > Did you make the actual test (mentioned somewhere below)?
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Best regards,
> > >> > > > > Gilles
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > On Sat, 5 Jan 2019 at 01:04, Amey Jadiye <
> [hidden email]>
> > >> > > wrote:
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > On Fri, 4 Jan 2019, 5:25 pm Gilles <
> > >> [hidden email]
> > >> > > > > wrote:
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > hi.
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > Hi Gilles,
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > On Thu, 3 Jan 2019 22:04:24 +0530, Amey Jadiye wrote:
> > >> > > > > > > > > Hello Maxim / All
> > >> > > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > > I put little more efforts to find out the possible
> cause
> > >> of the
> > >> > > > > > > > > error.
> > >> > > > > > > > > In the clirr code, I found the reason for this error
> and
> > >> same
> > >> > > is
> > >> > > > > > > > > documented
> > >> > > > > > > > > in clirr documentation [1].
> > >> > > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > > A method declaration has been added to the specified
> > >> interface.
> > >> > > > > This
> > >> > > > > > > > > is
> > >> > > > > > > > > always reported as a binary-compatibility error, but
> in
> > >> > > practice,
> > >> > > > > the
> > >> > > > > > > > > changed class might be used successfully with code
> > >> compiled
> > >> > > against
> > >> > > > > > > > > the old
> > >> > > > > > > > > interface depending upon usage patterns.
> > >> > > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > > Old code which invokes methods upon code compiled
> against
> > >> the
> > >> > > new
> > >> > > > > > > > > (expanded) interface will continue to work without
> > >> issues. And
> > >> > > old
> > >> > > > > > > > > code
> > >> > > > > > > > > which implements the old version of the interface will
> > >> also
> > >> > > > > continue
> > >> > > > > > > > > to
> > >> > > > > > > > > work correctly as long as no code attempts to invoke
> any
> > >> of the
> > >> > > > > > > > > newly-added
> > >> > > > > > > > > methods against that instance. But the code which
> > >> (validly)
> > >> > > invokes
> > >> > > > > > > > > one of
> > >> > > > > > > > > the new methods in the interface against an object
> which
> > >> > > implements
> > >> > > > > > > > > only
> > >> > > > > > > > > the old version of the interface will cause an
> > >> > > AbstractMethodError
> > >> > > > > to
> > >> > > > > > > > > be
> > >> > > > > > > > > thrown at the time the method invocation is attempted.
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > IIUC, new code that calls the new methods on
> [Collections]
> > >> > > classes
> > >> > > > > > > > will crash.  Does not look good.
> > >> > > > > > > > On the other hand, Maxim wrote earlier that a method
> > >> reported by
> > >> > > > > > > > Clirr as "new" (cf. below) was in fact present since
> Java
> > >> 6...
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > Are we then sure that it's a Clirr bug?
> > >> > > > > > > > If so, why did you not vote "+1" (on the condition that
> the
> > >> false
> > >> > > > > > > > positive is mentioned in the release notes)?
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > We could also make some definite progress with an actual
> > >> code
> > >> > > > > > > > example that calls the incriminated methods, compiled
> > >> against the
> > >> > > > > > > > current version of the library and then run against the
> > >> current
> > >> > > RC,
> > >> > > > > > > > and see whether it crashes.
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > Thanks for directions here, I must also check that. Till
> then
> > >> I
> > >> > > would
> > >> > > > > like
> > >> > > > > > > to change my vote to -1 (Non Binding) for this release.
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > Alternatively, we could instate "revapi" in the POM (and
> > >> disable
> > >> > > > > > > > Clirr); and if the report is clean, trust that (though
> > >> "revapi"
> > >> > > is
> > >> > > > > > > > still beta).
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > Opinions?
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > Gilles
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > > In 4.2 and 4.3 looks like we have upgraded the java
> > >> version[2]
> > >> > > > > where
> > >> > > > > > > > > for
> > >> > > > > > > > > example for Map interface might have added a few more
> > >> methods
> > >> > > > > causing
> > >> > > > > > > > > these
> > >> > > > > > > > > errors.
> > >> > > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > > For this release, I am voting 0 (Non-Binding) as
> there is
> > >> > > unharmed
> > >> > > > > > > > > mess
> > >> > > > > > > > > around the clirr.
> > >> > > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > > rest of the things are OK with this release, I would
> > >> encourage
> > >> > > to
> > >> > > > > > > > > have
> > >> > > > > > > > > revapi replacing clirr.
> > >> > > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > > [1]
> > >> http://clirr.sourceforge.net/clirr-core/exegesis.html
> > >> > > > > > > > > [2]
> > >> > > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > >
> > >>
> https://github.com/apache/commons-collections/commit/482762a13f739631f94d03642b0a55a9b7214c44
> > >> > > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > > Regards,
> > >> > > > > > > > > Amey
> > >> > > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jan 3, 2019 at 11:53 AM Amey Jadiye <
> > >> > > [hidden email]>
> > >> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > >> > > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > >> I spared little time on finding issue however didn't
> > >> found it
> > >> > > in
> > >> > > > > > > > >> clirr(may
> > >> > > > > > > > >> be hidden somewhere),  today will check if clirr
> maven
> > >> plugin
> > >> > > have
> > >> > > > > > > > >> any
> > >> > > > > > > > >> issues. also I saw that few other apache commons
> modules
> > >> > > having
> > >> > > > > same
> > >> > > > > > > > >> issue
> > >> > > > > > > > >> and are released.
> > >> > > > > > > > >>
> > >> > > > > > > > >> I also gave try on revapi with commons collection4
> > >> 4.3RC2.
> > >> > > > > > > > >> revapi:check
> > >> > > > > > > > >> was clean unlike clirr, looks promising to replace
> clirr.
> > >> > > > > > > > >>
> > >> > > > > > > > >> Regards,
> > >> > > > > > > > >> Amey
> > >> > > > > > > > >>
> > >> > > > > > > > >> On Wed, 2 Jan 2019, 12:31 pm Maxim Solodovnik <
> > >> > > > > [hidden email]
> > >> > > > > > > > >> wrote:
> > >> > > > > > > > >>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> Hello All,
> > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> Just checked clirr report one more time
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> This time I took 1 error and perform investigation:
> > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> "Method 'public java.util.Collection values()' has
> been
> > >> > > added to
> > >> > > > > an
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> interface" org.apache.commons.collections4.BidiMap
> > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> In fact I don't understand why this error was
> reported
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> BidiMap extends java.util.Map
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> Map has method "public java.util.Collection
> values()"
> > >> in all
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> versions:
> > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > >> https://docs.oracle.com/javase/6/docs/api/java/util/Map.html
> > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > >> https://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/api/java/util/Map.html
> > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > >> https://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/api/java/util/Map.html
> > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> Maybe its clirr issue?
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> Would appreciate any help with this investigation
> > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> On Mon, 31 Dec 2018 at 16:53, Gilles <
> > >> > > > > [hidden email]>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> wrote:
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> >
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > On Mon, 31 Dec 2018 07:41:40 +0700, Maxim
> Solodovnik
> > >> wrote:
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > > Hello Gilles,
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > > I already did analysis: [1], all errors are
> caused
> > >> by
> > >> > > > > previous
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > > release
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > > 4.3 doesn't introduce any new errors ...
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > > [1]
> https://markmail.org/message/l7ftxlvdk4yqxijt
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> >
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > I had seen the post but it says:
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > ---
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > these errors are weird. Above classes has no
> changes
> > >> > > comparing
> > >> > > > > to
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> 4.2
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > ---
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> >
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > But IMHO it was not a conclusion: If the cause of
> the
> > >> > > errors
> > >> > > > > was
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > identified, it could have been mentioned in the
> > >> release
> > >> > > notes
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > and/or the [VOTE] email, in order to avoid further
> > >> > > questioning.
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> >
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > Is the cause the change of supported JDK?
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> >
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > Regards,
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > Gilles
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> >
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > > On Mon, 31 Dec 2018 at 07:26, Rob Tompkins <
> > >> > > > > [hidden email]>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > > wrote:
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> I’ll give it a look tonight or in the morning.
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> -Rob
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> > On Dec 30, 2018, at 12:25 AM, Maxim
> Solodovnik
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> > No votes after 3 days :(
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> > Is there anything wrong with the RC?
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> On Thu, 27 Dec 2018 at 05:20, Bruno P.
> Kinoshita
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> FWIW I had a similar experience, and
> realized I
> > >> was
> > >> > > doing
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> `git
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> fetch --all`, but it didn't bring the tags.
> `git
> > >> fetch
> > >> > > > > --tags`
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> did
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> the
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> trick. After that I could `git checkout
> $tag-name`
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> Cheers
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> Bruno
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> ________________________________
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> From: Gilles <[hidden email]>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> To: [hidden email]
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> Sent: Thursday, 27 December 2018 9:26 AM
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> Subject: Re: [VOTE][RC2] Commons
> collections 4.3
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> On Wed, 26 Dec 2018 21:21:34 +0100, Gilles
> > >> wrote:
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> Hi.
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> On Wed, 26 Dec 2018 20:41:59 +0700, Maxim
> > >> > > Solodovnik
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> wrote:
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> This is a [VOTE] for releasing
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Apache Commons collections 4.3
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Tag name:
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>    collections-4.3-RC2 (signature can be
> > >> checked
> > >> > > from
> > >> > > > > git
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> using
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> 'git
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> tag -v')
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> $ git tag -v collections-4.3-RC2
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> error: tag 'collections-4.3-RC2' not found.
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> Although I see it in the link below...
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> What is going on?
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> Issue vanished with a fresh "clone".
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> [Sorry for the noise.]
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> RC1 was cancelled due to some release
> steps
> > >> were
> > >> > > not
> > >> > > > > done
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Tag URL:
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > >
> > >>
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=commons-collections.git;a=commit;h=77e37dbf238d26351edb29e95391e3df75095d01
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Commit ID the tag points at:
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> 77e37dbf238d26351edb29e95391e3df75095d01
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Site:
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > >
> > >>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/4.3-RC2/site/index.html
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> The Clirr report is still a problem:
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > >
> > >>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/4.3-RC2/site/clirr-report.html
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> [The same errors are reported on my
> machine,
> > >> so it's
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> not a cache issue...]
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> Regards,
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> Gilles
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Distribution files (committed at revision
> > >> 31689):
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > >> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Distribution files hashes (SHA256):
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-bin.tar.gz
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > >> > > 214c12fae27403f1a16ca6c108b5a8682be1a885a0dbbfc8eb30941303e1fe94
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-bin.zip
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > >> > > 75b51a98fea6fca3746a3f70c6a0be24c99849e4976c4649214eaa5a009d0aeb
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-src.tar.gz
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > >> > > 399f403feca86dbba7c4162eb90174db45979a2f7db2b3e0ba48240dc43ab434
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-src.zip
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > >> > > 1c637e260b5b9e372d196593c7617ad3adedb6da3ac9196d086f9fc24401f5c3
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> KEYS file to check signatures:
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> https://www.apache.org/dist/commons/KEYS
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Maven artifacts:
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > >
> > >>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1405/
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Please select one of the following
> options:
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] +1 Release it.
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] +0 Go ahead; I don't care.
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] -0 There are a few minor glitches:
> ...
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] -1 No, do not release it because ...
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> This vote will be open for at least 72
> hours,
> > >> i.e.
> > >> > > > > until
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> 2018-12-29T14:00:00Z
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> (this is UTC time).
> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >> > > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> [hidden email]
> > >> > > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail:
> > >> [hidden email]
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > --
> > >> > > > > > WBR
> > >> > > > > > Maxim aka solomax
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > >
> > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >> > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > >> > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > --
> > >> > > > WBR
> > >> > > > Maxim aka solomax
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > >> > > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >>
> > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > >> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> > --
> > WBR
> > Maxim aka solomax
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>

--
WBR
Maxim aka solomax
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE][RC2] Commons collections 4.3

Gilles Sadowski-2
Hi.

Le ven. 18 janv. 2019 à 18:07, Maxim Solodovnik <[hidden email]> a écrit :

>
> OK
>
> here is the test:
> https://gist.github.com/solomax/a6fbec6db71bb28dfe53afc566086505
> It was compiled using
>
> java version "1.8.0_201"
> Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.8.0_201-b09)
> Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM (build 25.201-b09, mixed mode)
>
> `javac -cp
> ~/.m2/repository/org/apache/commons/commons-collections4/4.2/commons-collections4-4.2.jar
> src/org/tmp/Test.java`
>
> It was run with
> 1) `java -cp
> ~/.m2/repository/org/apache/commons/commons-collections4/4.2/commons-collections4-4.2.jar:src/
> org.tmp.Test`
> 2) `java -cp
> ~/.m2/repository/org/apache/commons/commons-collections4/4.3/commons-collections4-4.3.jar:src/
> org.tmp.Test `
>
> no crash

Great. :-)
[And let's drop Clirr!]

> ps this is the first time I need to write java tests during release process

Actually, explaining the Clirr report is a prerequisite...[1]
Another way would have been to check out the code at the point before it
required Java 8; and see that the version bump was indeed the cause of
the spurious errors.

Regards,
Gilles

[1] https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=commons-rng.git;a=blob;f=doc/release/release.howto.txt;h=53f5e77de0aa1afeac151654850a4a26c1f59630;hb=HEAD#l73

> ....
>
> On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 at 22:37, sebb <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > We don't really know why it is being reported as an error.
> >
> > But what's important is to understand whether the report is valid or not.
> >
> > The way to check that is to try it out, as noted else-thread:
> >
> > ---cut here---
> > We could also make some definite progress with an actual code
> > example that calls the incriminated methods, compiled against the
> > current version of the library and then run against the current RC,
> > and see whether it crashes.
> > ---cut here---
> >
> > i.e. see what happens if someone updates the library without
> > recompiling their code.
> >
> > Once we have established that the Clirr error is a false positive,
> > this can be noted in the release notes.
> >
> > S.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 at 15:20, Maxim Solodovnik <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > OK
> > >
> > > I have checked
> > > clirr is the same (comparing to 4.2)
> > >
> > > I would appreciate is someone can perform detailed analysis here of one
> > > error (the first one from here [1])
> > >
> > > first error is:
> > > Message: "Method 'public java.util.Collection values()' has been added to
> > > an interface"
> > > Class: "org.apache.commons.collections4.BidiMap"
> > > Method/Field: "public java.util.Collection values()"
> > >
> > > BidiMap has method "Set<V> values()" since 4.0 (haven't checked earlier
> > > versions),
> > > java.util.Set extends java.util.Collection since java6
> > > The only thing was changed is "@Override" annotation was added
> > >
> > > Why is this being reported as error?
> > >
> > > [1]
> > >
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/4.3-RC2/site/clirr-report.html
> > >
> > > On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 at 23:50, Maxim Solodovnik <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > I'll try to double-check if clirr version was changed
> > > > So far I believe the issue is caused by java8 update
> > > >
> > > > Will report back here
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Jan 17, 2019, 23:39 Gilles Sadowski <[hidden email]
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Hi.
> > > >>
> > > >> Le jeu. 17 janv. 2019 à 17:21, Maxim Solodovnik <[hidden email]>
> > a
> > > >> écrit :
> > > >> >
> > > >> > It seems to be "stalemate situation"
> > > >> > The test wasn't written for a long period of time
> > > >>
> > > >> Writing the test would seem to be the best chance.
> > > >>
> > > >> What is still not clear to me is whether the previous version
> > > >> was released with Clirr errors too.
> > > >> If yes, then the question might become: Why ask you to fix
> > > >> what was broken before?
> > > >> If not, then you could look whether the Clirr version was
> > > >> changed in the meantime, and if so, run the older versions
> > > >> of the tool until the issue disappears.
> > > >>
> > > >> > And there not enough votes to release :(
> > > >>
> > > >> That's an ever more recurring issue within "Commons", and
> > > >> the PMC does not seem intent on recognizing it. :-/
> > > >>
> > > >> Regards,
> > > >> Gilles
> > > >>
> > > >> > On Thu, Jan 17, 2019, 22:59 Gilles Sadowski <[hidden email]
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > Le jeu. 17 janv. 2019 à 16:17, Maxim Solodovnik <
> > [hidden email]>
> > > >> a
> > > >> > > écrit :
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > Actually I don't get what need to be tested :(
> > > >> > > > Can you please provide "textual description" of what need to be
> > > >> tested?
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Pasted from below:
> > > >> > > > > > > > We could also make some definite progress with an actual
> > > >> code
> > > >> > > > > > > > example that calls the incriminated methods, compiled
> > > >> against the
> > > >> > > > > > > > current version of the library and then run against the
> > > >> current
> > > >> > > RC,
> > > >> > > > > > > > and see whether it crashes.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > > Current version works as expected with Java8 application, no
> > issues
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Then: Why a new major version?
> > > >> > > It looks like sweeping dust under the carpet. ;-)
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > If nobody wants to write a test, then we could just release the
> > > >> current
> > > >> > > RC (with a mention that Clirr signals errors that we chose to
> > ignore),
> > > >> > > and if someone complains later on (if indeed BC would have been
> > > >> broken),
> > > >> > > release a bugfix version.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Regards,
> > > >> > > Gilles
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > > All current tests are green
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 at 19:14, Gilles Sadowski <
> > [hidden email]
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > wrote:
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > > Hello.
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > > Le jeu. 17 janv. 2019 à 04:24, Maxim Solodovnik <
> > > >> [hidden email]>
> > > >> > > a
> > > >> > > > > écrit :
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > Hello All,
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > Shall I cancel this VOTE and change project coordinates to
> > be
> > > >> > > > > > commons-collections5 ?
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > > I must have missed part of the thread...  IMO, a major
> > release is
> > > >> not
> > > >> > > > > the answer to a possible false positive.
> > > >> > > > > Did you make the actual test (mentioned somewhere below)?
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > > Best regards,
> > > >> > > > > Gilles
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > On Sat, 5 Jan 2019 at 01:04, Amey Jadiye <
> > [hidden email]>
> > > >> > > wrote:
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > On Fri, 4 Jan 2019, 5:25 pm Gilles <
> > > >> [hidden email]
> > > >> > > > > wrote:
> > > >> > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > hi.
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > Hi Gilles,
> > > >> > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > On Thu, 3 Jan 2019 22:04:24 +0530, Amey Jadiye wrote:
> > > >> > > > > > > > > Hello Maxim / All
> > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > I put little more efforts to find out the possible
> > cause
> > > >> of the
> > > >> > > > > > > > > error.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > In the clirr code, I found the reason for this error
> > and
> > > >> same
> > > >> > > is
> > > >> > > > > > > > > documented
> > > >> > > > > > > > > in clirr documentation [1].
> > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > A method declaration has been added to the specified
> > > >> interface.
> > > >> > > > > This
> > > >> > > > > > > > > is
> > > >> > > > > > > > > always reported as a binary-compatibility error, but
> > in
> > > >> > > practice,
> > > >> > > > > the
> > > >> > > > > > > > > changed class might be used successfully with code
> > > >> compiled
> > > >> > > against
> > > >> > > > > > > > > the old
> > > >> > > > > > > > > interface depending upon usage patterns.
> > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > Old code which invokes methods upon code compiled
> > against
> > > >> the
> > > >> > > new
> > > >> > > > > > > > > (expanded) interface will continue to work without
> > > >> issues. And
> > > >> > > old
> > > >> > > > > > > > > code
> > > >> > > > > > > > > which implements the old version of the interface will
> > > >> also
> > > >> > > > > continue
> > > >> > > > > > > > > to
> > > >> > > > > > > > > work correctly as long as no code attempts to invoke
> > any
> > > >> of the
> > > >> > > > > > > > > newly-added
> > > >> > > > > > > > > methods against that instance. But the code which
> > > >> (validly)
> > > >> > > invokes
> > > >> > > > > > > > > one of
> > > >> > > > > > > > > the new methods in the interface against an object
> > which
> > > >> > > implements
> > > >> > > > > > > > > only
> > > >> > > > > > > > > the old version of the interface will cause an
> > > >> > > AbstractMethodError
> > > >> > > > > to
> > > >> > > > > > > > > be
> > > >> > > > > > > > > thrown at the time the method invocation is attempted.
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > IIUC, new code that calls the new methods on
> > [Collections]
> > > >> > > classes
> > > >> > > > > > > > will crash.  Does not look good.
> > > >> > > > > > > > On the other hand, Maxim wrote earlier that a method
> > > >> reported by
> > > >> > > > > > > > Clirr as "new" (cf. below) was in fact present since
> > Java
> > > >> 6...
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > Are we then sure that it's a Clirr bug?
> > > >> > > > > > > > If so, why did you not vote "+1" (on the condition that
> > the
> > > >> false
> > > >> > > > > > > > positive is mentioned in the release notes)?
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > We could also make some definite progress with an actual
> > > >> code
> > > >> > > > > > > > example that calls the incriminated methods, compiled
> > > >> against the
> > > >> > > > > > > > current version of the library and then run against the
> > > >> current
> > > >> > > RC,
> > > >> > > > > > > > and see whether it crashes.
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > Thanks for directions here, I must also check that. Till
> > then
> > > >> I
> > > >> > > would
> > > >> > > > > like
> > > >> > > > > > > to change my vote to -1 (Non Binding) for this release.
> > > >> > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > Alternatively, we could instate "revapi" in the POM (and
> > > >> disable
> > > >> > > > > > > > Clirr); and if the report is clean, trust that (though
> > > >> "revapi"
> > > >> > > is
> > > >> > > > > > > > still beta).
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > Opinions?
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > Gilles
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > In 4.2 and 4.3 looks like we have upgraded the java
> > > >> version[2]
> > > >> > > > > where
> > > >> > > > > > > > > for
> > > >> > > > > > > > > example for Map interface might have added a few more
> > > >> methods
> > > >> > > > > causing
> > > >> > > > > > > > > these
> > > >> > > > > > > > > errors.
> > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > For this release, I am voting 0 (Non-Binding) as
> > there is
> > > >> > > unharmed
> > > >> > > > > > > > > mess
> > > >> > > > > > > > > around the clirr.
> > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > rest of the things are OK with this release, I would
> > > >> encourage
> > > >> > > to
> > > >> > > > > > > > > have
> > > >> > > > > > > > > revapi replacing clirr.
> > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > [1]
> > > >> http://clirr.sourceforge.net/clirr-core/exegesis.html
> > > >> > > > > > > > > [2]
> > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >>
> > https://github.com/apache/commons-collections/commit/482762a13f739631f94d03642b0a55a9b7214c44
> > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > Regards,
> > > >> > > > > > > > > Amey
> > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jan 3, 2019 at 11:53 AM Amey Jadiye <
> > > >> > > [hidden email]>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > >> I spared little time on finding issue however didn't
> > > >> found it
> > > >> > > in
> > > >> > > > > > > > >> clirr(may
> > > >> > > > > > > > >> be hidden somewhere),  today will check if clirr
> > maven
> > > >> plugin
> > > >> > > have
> > > >> > > > > > > > >> any
> > > >> > > > > > > > >> issues. also I saw that few other apache commons
> > modules
> > > >> > > having
> > > >> > > > > same
> > > >> > > > > > > > >> issue
> > > >> > > > > > > > >> and are released.
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >> I also gave try on revapi with commons collection4
> > > >> 4.3RC2.
> > > >> > > > > > > > >> revapi:check
> > > >> > > > > > > > >> was clean unlike clirr, looks promising to replace
> > clirr.
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >> Regards,
> > > >> > > > > > > > >> Amey
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >> On Wed, 2 Jan 2019, 12:31 pm Maxim Solodovnik <
> > > >> > > > > [hidden email]
> > > >> > > > > > > > >> wrote:
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> Hello All,
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> Just checked clirr report one more time
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> This time I took 1 error and perform investigation:
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> "Method 'public java.util.Collection values()' has
> > been
> > > >> > > added to
> > > >> > > > > an
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> interface" org.apache.commons.collections4.BidiMap
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> In fact I don't understand why this error was
> > reported
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> BidiMap extends java.util.Map
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> Map has method "public java.util.Collection
> > values()"
> > > >> in all
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> versions:
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > >> https://docs.oracle.com/javase/6/docs/api/java/util/Map.html
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > >> https://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/api/java/util/Map.html
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > >> https://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/api/java/util/Map.html
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> Maybe its clirr issue?
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> Would appreciate any help with this investigation
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> On Mon, 31 Dec 2018 at 16:53, Gilles <
> > > >> > > > > [hidden email]>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> wrote:
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> >
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > On Mon, 31 Dec 2018 07:41:40 +0700, Maxim
> > Solodovnik
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > > Hello Gilles,
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > > I already did analysis: [1], all errors are
> > caused
> > > >> by
> > > >> > > > > previous
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > > release
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > > 4.3 doesn't introduce any new errors ...
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > > [1]
> > https://markmail.org/message/l7ftxlvdk4yqxijt
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> >
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > I had seen the post but it says:
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > ---
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > these errors are weird. Above classes has no
> > changes
> > > >> > > comparing
> > > >> > > > > to
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> 4.2
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > ---
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> >
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > But IMHO it was not a conclusion: If the cause of
> > the
> > > >> > > errors
> > > >> > > > > was
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > identified, it could have been mentioned in the
> > > >> release
> > > >> > > notes
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > and/or the [VOTE] email, in order to avoid further
> > > >> > > questioning.
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> >
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > Is the cause the change of supported JDK?
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> >
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > Regards,
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > Gilles
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> >
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > > On Mon, 31 Dec 2018 at 07:26, Rob Tompkins <
> > > >> > > > > [hidden email]>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > > wrote:
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> I’ll give it a look tonight or in the morning.
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> -Rob
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> > On Dec 30, 2018, at 12:25 AM, Maxim
> > Solodovnik
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> > No votes after 3 days :(
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> > Is there anything wrong with the RC?
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> On Thu, 27 Dec 2018 at 05:20, Bruno P.
> > Kinoshita
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> FWIW I had a similar experience, and
> > realized I
> > > >> was
> > > >> > > doing
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> `git
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> fetch --all`, but it didn't bring the tags.
> > `git
> > > >> fetch
> > > >> > > > > --tags`
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> did
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> the
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> trick. After that I could `git checkout
> > $tag-name`
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> Cheers
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> Bruno
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> ________________________________
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> From: Gilles <[hidden email]>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> To: [hidden email]
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> Sent: Thursday, 27 December 2018 9:26 AM
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> Subject: Re: [VOTE][RC2] Commons
> > collections 4.3
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> On Wed, 26 Dec 2018 21:21:34 +0100, Gilles
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> Hi.
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> On Wed, 26 Dec 2018 20:41:59 +0700, Maxim
> > > >> > > Solodovnik
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> wrote:
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> This is a [VOTE] for releasing
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Apache Commons collections 4.3
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Tag name:
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>    collections-4.3-RC2 (signature can be
> > > >> checked
> > > >> > > from
> > > >> > > > > git
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> using
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> 'git
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> tag -v')
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> $ git tag -v collections-4.3-RC2
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> error: tag 'collections-4.3-RC2' not found.
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> Although I see it in the link below...
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> What is going on?
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> Issue vanished with a fresh "clone".
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> [Sorry for the noise.]
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> RC1 was cancelled due to some release
> > steps
> > > >> were
> > > >> > > not
> > > >> > > > > done
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Tag URL:
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >>
> > https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=commons-collections.git;a=commit;h=77e37dbf238d26351edb29e95391e3df75095d01
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Commit ID the tag points at:
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > 77e37dbf238d26351edb29e95391e3df75095d01
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Site:
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >>
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/4.3-RC2/site/index.html
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> The Clirr report is still a problem:
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >>
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/4.3-RC2/site/clirr-report.html
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> [The same errors are reported on my
> > machine,
> > > >> so it's
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> not a cache issue...]
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> Regards,
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> Gilles
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Distribution files (committed at revision
> > > >> 31689):
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > >> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Distribution files hashes (SHA256):
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-bin.tar.gz
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > >> > > 214c12fae27403f1a16ca6c108b5a8682be1a885a0dbbfc8eb30941303e1fe94
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-bin.zip
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > >> > > 75b51a98fea6fca3746a3f70c6a0be24c99849e4976c4649214eaa5a009d0aeb
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-src.tar.gz
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > >> > > 399f403feca86dbba7c4162eb90174db45979a2f7db2b3e0ba48240dc43ab434
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-src.zip
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > >> > > 1c637e260b5b9e372d196593c7617ad3adedb6da3ac9196d086f9fc24401f5c3
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> KEYS file to check signatures:
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > https://www.apache.org/dist/commons/KEYS
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Maven artifacts:
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >>
> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1405/
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Please select one of the following
> > options:
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] +1 Release it.
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] +0 Go ahead; I don't care.
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] -0 There are a few minor glitches:
> > ...
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] -1 No, do not release it because ...
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> This vote will be open for at least 72
> > hours,
> > > >> i.e.
> > > >> > > > > until
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> 2018-12-29T14:00:00Z
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> (this is UTC time).
> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > >> > > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> > [hidden email]
> > > >> > > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail:
> > > >> [hidden email]
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > --
> > > >> > > > > > WBR
> > > >> > > > > > Maxim aka solomax
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > >> > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > >> > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > --
> > > >> > > > WBR
> > > >> > > > Maxim aka solomax
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > >> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > >> > > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >>
> > > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > >> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > >
> > > --
> > > WBR
> > > Maxim aka solomax
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >
> >
>
> --
> WBR
> Maxim aka solomax

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE][RC2] Commons collections 4.3

Maxim Solodovnik
Hello All,

Am I right thinking it is OK to add something like
"Clirr errors reported for this version can be ignored" to release NOTES
and proceed with VOTE?

If I'm not mistaken after almost a month of voting we have
Binding:
1: +1 (Bruno P. Kinoshita)
Non-binding:
1: +1 (Maxim Solodovnik)
1: -1 (Amey Jadiye)

On Sat, 19 Jan 2019 at 08:07, Gilles Sadowski <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi.
>
> Le ven. 18 janv. 2019 à 18:07, Maxim Solodovnik <[hidden email]> a
> écrit :
> >
> > OK
> >
> > here is the test:
> > https://gist.github.com/solomax/a6fbec6db71bb28dfe53afc566086505
> > It was compiled using
> >
> > java version "1.8.0_201"
> > Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.8.0_201-b09)
> > Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM (build 25.201-b09, mixed mode)
> >
> > `javac -cp
> >
> ~/.m2/repository/org/apache/commons/commons-collections4/4.2/commons-collections4-4.2.jar
> > src/org/tmp/Test.java`
> >
> > It was run with
> > 1) `java -cp
> >
> ~/.m2/repository/org/apache/commons/commons-collections4/4.2/commons-collections4-4.2.jar:src/
> > org.tmp.Test`
> > 2) `java -cp
> >
> ~/.m2/repository/org/apache/commons/commons-collections4/4.3/commons-collections4-4.3.jar:src/
> > org.tmp.Test `
> >
> > no crash
>
> Great. :-)
> [And let's drop Clirr!]
>
> > ps this is the first time I need to write java tests during release
> process
>
> Actually, explaining the Clirr report is a prerequisite...[1]
> Another way would have been to check out the code at the point before it
> required Java 8; and see that the version bump was indeed the cause of
> the spurious errors.
>
> Regards,
> Gilles
>
> [1]
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=commons-rng.git;a=blob;f=doc/release/release.howto.txt;h=53f5e77de0aa1afeac151654850a4a26c1f59630;hb=HEAD#l73
>
> > ....
> >
> > On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 at 22:37, sebb <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > > We don't really know why it is being reported as an error.
> > >
> > > But what's important is to understand whether the report is valid or
> not.
> > >
> > > The way to check that is to try it out, as noted else-thread:
> > >
> > > ---cut here---
> > > We could also make some definite progress with an actual code
> > > example that calls the incriminated methods, compiled against the
> > > current version of the library and then run against the current RC,
> > > and see whether it crashes.
> > > ---cut here---
> > >
> > > i.e. see what happens if someone updates the library without
> > > recompiling their code.
> > >
> > > Once we have established that the Clirr error is a false positive,
> > > this can be noted in the release notes.
> > >
> > > S.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 at 15:20, Maxim Solodovnik <[hidden email]>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > OK
> > > >
> > > > I have checked
> > > > clirr is the same (comparing to 4.2)
> > > >
> > > > I would appreciate is someone can perform detailed analysis here of
> one
> > > > error (the first one from here [1])
> > > >
> > > > first error is:
> > > > Message: "Method 'public java.util.Collection values()' has been
> added to
> > > > an interface"
> > > > Class: "org.apache.commons.collections4.BidiMap"
> > > > Method/Field: "public java.util.Collection values()"
> > > >
> > > > BidiMap has method "Set<V> values()" since 4.0 (haven't checked
> earlier
> > > > versions),
> > > > java.util.Set extends java.util.Collection since java6
> > > > The only thing was changed is "@Override" annotation was added
> > > >
> > > > Why is this being reported as error?
> > > >
> > > > [1]
> > > >
> > >
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/4.3-RC2/site/clirr-report.html
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 at 23:50, Maxim Solodovnik <[hidden email]
> >
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I'll try to double-check if clirr version was changed
> > > > > So far I believe the issue is caused by java8 update
> > > > >
> > > > > Will report back here
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Jan 17, 2019, 23:39 Gilles Sadowski <[hidden email]
> > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> Hi.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Le jeu. 17 janv. 2019 à 17:21, Maxim Solodovnik <
> [hidden email]>
> > > a
> > > > >> écrit :
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > It seems to be "stalemate situation"
> > > > >> > The test wasn't written for a long period of time
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Writing the test would seem to be the best chance.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> What is still not clear to me is whether the previous version
> > > > >> was released with Clirr errors too.
> > > > >> If yes, then the question might become: Why ask you to fix
> > > > >> what was broken before?
> > > > >> If not, then you could look whether the Clirr version was
> > > > >> changed in the meantime, and if so, run the older versions
> > > > >> of the tool until the issue disappears.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> > And there not enough votes to release :(
> > > > >>
> > > > >> That's an ever more recurring issue within "Commons", and
> > > > >> the PMC does not seem intent on recognizing it. :-/
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Regards,
> > > > >> Gilles
> > > > >>
> > > > >> > On Thu, Jan 17, 2019, 22:59 Gilles Sadowski <
> [hidden email]
> > > > >> wrote:
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > > Le jeu. 17 janv. 2019 à 16:17, Maxim Solodovnik <
> > > [hidden email]>
> > > > >> a
> > > > >> > > écrit :
> > > > >> > > >
> > > > >> > > > Actually I don't get what need to be tested :(
> > > > >> > > > Can you please provide "textual description" of what need
> to be
> > > > >> tested?
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > > Pasted from below:
> > > > >> > > > > > > > We could also make some definite progress with an
> actual
> > > > >> code
> > > > >> > > > > > > > example that calls the incriminated methods,
> compiled
> > > > >> against the
> > > > >> > > > > > > > current version of the library and then run against
> the
> > > > >> current
> > > > >> > > RC,
> > > > >> > > > > > > > and see whether it crashes.
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > > > Current version works as expected with Java8 application, no
> > > issues
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > > Then: Why a new major version?
> > > > >> > > It looks like sweeping dust under the carpet. ;-)
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > > If nobody wants to write a test, then we could just release
> the
> > > > >> current
> > > > >> > > RC (with a mention that Clirr signals errors that we chose to
> > > ignore),
> > > > >> > > and if someone complains later on (if indeed BC would have
> been
> > > > >> broken),
> > > > >> > > release a bugfix version.
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > > Regards,
> > > > >> > > Gilles
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > > > All current tests are green
> > > > >> > > >
> > > > >> > > > On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 at 19:14, Gilles Sadowski <
> > > [hidden email]
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > > wrote:
> > > > >> > > >
> > > > >> > > > > Hello.
> > > > >> > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > Le jeu. 17 janv. 2019 à 04:24, Maxim Solodovnik <
> > > > >> [hidden email]>
> > > > >> > > a
> > > > >> > > > > écrit :
> > > > >> > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > Hello All,
> > > > >> > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > Shall I cancel this VOTE and change project coordinates
> to
> > > be
> > > > >> > > > > > commons-collections5 ?
> > > > >> > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > I must have missed part of the thread...  IMO, a major
> > > release is
> > > > >> not
> > > > >> > > > > the answer to a possible false positive.
> > > > >> > > > > Did you make the actual test (mentioned somewhere below)?
> > > > >> > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > Best regards,
> > > > >> > > > > Gilles
> > > > >> > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > On Sat, 5 Jan 2019 at 01:04, Amey Jadiye <
> > > [hidden email]>
> > > > >> > > wrote:
> > > > >> > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > On Fri, 4 Jan 2019, 5:25 pm Gilles <
> > > > >> [hidden email]
> > > > >> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >> > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > hi.
> > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > Hi Gilles,
> > > > >> > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > On Thu, 3 Jan 2019 22:04:24 +0530, Amey Jadiye
> wrote:
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > Hello Maxim / All
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > I put little more efforts to find out the possible
> > > cause
> > > > >> of the
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > error.
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > In the clirr code, I found the reason for this
> error
> > > and
> > > > >> same
> > > > >> > > is
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > documented
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > in clirr documentation [1].
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > A method declaration has been added to the
> specified
> > > > >> interface.
> > > > >> > > > > This
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > is
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > always reported as a binary-compatibility error,
> but
> > > in
> > > > >> > > practice,
> > > > >> > > > > the
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > changed class might be used successfully with code
> > > > >> compiled
> > > > >> > > against
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > the old
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > interface depending upon usage patterns.
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > Old code which invokes methods upon code compiled
> > > against
> > > > >> the
> > > > >> > > new
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > (expanded) interface will continue to work without
> > > > >> issues. And
> > > > >> > > old
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > code
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > which implements the old version of the interface
> will
> > > > >> also
> > > > >> > > > > continue
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > to
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > work correctly as long as no code attempts to
> invoke
> > > any
> > > > >> of the
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > newly-added
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > methods against that instance. But the code which
> > > > >> (validly)
> > > > >> > > invokes
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > one of
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > the new methods in the interface against an object
> > > which
> > > > >> > > implements
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > only
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > the old version of the interface will cause an
> > > > >> > > AbstractMethodError
> > > > >> > > > > to
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > be
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > thrown at the time the method invocation is
> attempted.
> > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > IIUC, new code that calls the new methods on
> > > [Collections]
> > > > >> > > classes
> > > > >> > > > > > > > will crash.  Does not look good.
> > > > >> > > > > > > > On the other hand, Maxim wrote earlier that a method
> > > > >> reported by
> > > > >> > > > > > > > Clirr as "new" (cf. below) was in fact present since
> > > Java
> > > > >> 6...
> > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > Are we then sure that it's a Clirr bug?
> > > > >> > > > > > > > If so, why did you not vote "+1" (on the condition
> that
> > > the
> > > > >> false
> > > > >> > > > > > > > positive is mentioned in the release notes)?
> > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > We could also make some definite progress with an
> actual
> > > > >> code
> > > > >> > > > > > > > example that calls the incriminated methods,
> compiled
> > > > >> against the
> > > > >> > > > > > > > current version of the library and then run against
> the
> > > > >> current
> > > > >> > > RC,
> > > > >> > > > > > > > and see whether it crashes.
> > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > Thanks for directions here, I must also check that.
> Till
> > > then
> > > > >> I
> > > > >> > > would
> > > > >> > > > > like
> > > > >> > > > > > > to change my vote to -1 (Non Binding) for this
> release.
> > > > >> > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > Alternatively, we could instate "revapi" in the POM
> (and
> > > > >> disable
> > > > >> > > > > > > > Clirr); and if the report is clean, trust that
> (though
> > > > >> "revapi"
> > > > >> > > is
> > > > >> > > > > > > > still beta).
> > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > Opinions?
> > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > Gilles
> > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > In 4.2 and 4.3 looks like we have upgraded the
> java
> > > > >> version[2]
> > > > >> > > > > where
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > for
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > example for Map interface might have added a few
> more
> > > > >> methods
> > > > >> > > > > causing
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > these
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > errors.
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > For this release, I am voting 0 (Non-Binding) as
> > > there is
> > > > >> > > unharmed
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > mess
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > around the clirr.
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > rest of the things are OK with this release, I
> would
> > > > >> encourage
> > > > >> > > to
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > have
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > revapi replacing clirr.
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > [1]
> > > > >> http://clirr.sourceforge.net/clirr-core/exegesis.html
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > [2]
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > >
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >>
> > >
> https://github.com/apache/commons-collections/commit/482762a13f739631f94d03642b0a55a9b7214c44
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > Regards,
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > Amey
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jan 3, 2019 at 11:53 AM Amey Jadiye <
> > > > >> > > [hidden email]>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >> I spared little time on finding issue however
> didn't
> > > > >> found it
> > > > >> > > in
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >> clirr(may
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >> be hidden somewhere),  today will check if clirr
> > > maven
> > > > >> plugin
> > > > >> > > have
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >> any
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >> issues. also I saw that few other apache commons
> > > modules
> > > > >> > > having
> > > > >> > > > > same
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >> issue
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >> and are released.
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >> I also gave try on revapi with commons
> collection4
> > > > >> 4.3RC2.
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >> revapi:check
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >> was clean unlike clirr, looks promising to
> replace
> > > clirr.
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >> Regards,
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >> Amey
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >> On Wed, 2 Jan 2019, 12:31 pm Maxim Solodovnik <
> > > > >> > > > > [hidden email]
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> Hello All,
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> Just checked clirr report one more time
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> This time I took 1 error and perform
> investigation:
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> "Method 'public java.util.Collection values()'
> has
> > > been
> > > > >> > > added to
> > > > >> > > > > an
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> interface"
> org.apache.commons.collections4.BidiMap
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> In fact I don't understand why this error was
> > > reported
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> BidiMap extends java.util.Map
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> Map has method "public java.util.Collection
> > > values()"
> > > > >> in all
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> versions:
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > >> https://docs.oracle.com/javase/6/docs/api/java/util/Map.html
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > >> https://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/api/java/util/Map.html
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > >> https://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/api/java/util/Map.html
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> Maybe its clirr issue?
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> Would appreciate any help with this
> investigation
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> On Mon, 31 Dec 2018 at 16:53, Gilles <
> > > > >> > > > > [hidden email]>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > On Mon, 31 Dec 2018 07:41:40 +0700, Maxim
> > > Solodovnik
> > > > >> wrote:
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > > Hello Gilles,
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > > I already did analysis: [1], all errors are
> > > caused
> > > > >> by
> > > > >> > > > > previous
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > > release
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > > 4.3 doesn't introduce any new errors ...
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > > [1]
> > > https://markmail.org/message/l7ftxlvdk4yqxijt
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > I had seen the post but it says:
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > ---
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > these errors are weird. Above classes has no
> > > changes
> > > > >> > > comparing
> > > > >> > > > > to
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> 4.2
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > ---
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > But IMHO it was not a conclusion: If the
> cause of
> > > the
> > > > >> > > errors
> > > > >> > > > > was
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > identified, it could have been mentioned in
> the
> > > > >> release
> > > > >> > > notes
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > and/or the [VOTE] email, in order to avoid
> further
> > > > >> > > questioning.
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > Is the cause the change of supported JDK?
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > Regards,
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > Gilles
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > > On Mon, 31 Dec 2018 at 07:26, Rob Tompkins <
> > > > >> > > > > [hidden email]>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > > wrote:
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> I’ll give it a look tonight or in the
> morning.
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> -Rob
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> > On Dec 30, 2018, at 12:25 AM, Maxim
> > > Solodovnik
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> > No votes after 3 days :(
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> > Is there anything wrong with the RC?
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> On Thu, 27 Dec 2018 at 05:20, Bruno P.
> > > Kinoshita
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> FWIW I had a similar experience, and
> > > realized I
> > > > >> was
> > > > >> > > doing
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> `git
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> fetch --all`, but it didn't bring the tags.
> > > `git
> > > > >> fetch
> > > > >> > > > > --tags`
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> did
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> the
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> trick. After that I could `git checkout
> > > $tag-name`
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> Cheers
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> Bruno
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> ________________________________
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> From: Gilles <
> [hidden email]>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> To: [hidden email]
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> Sent: Thursday, 27 December 2018 9:26 AM
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> Subject: Re: [VOTE][RC2] Commons
> > > collections 4.3
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> On Wed, 26 Dec 2018 21:21:34 +0100,
> Gilles
> > > > >> wrote:
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> Hi.
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> On Wed, 26 Dec 2018 20:41:59 +0700,
> Maxim
> > > > >> > > Solodovnik
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> This is a [VOTE] for releasing
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Apache Commons collections 4.3
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Tag name:
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>    collections-4.3-RC2 (signature can
> be
> > > > >> checked
> > > > >> > > from
> > > > >> > > > > git
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> using
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> 'git
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> tag -v')
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> $ git tag -v collections-4.3-RC2
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> error: tag 'collections-4.3-RC2' not
> found.
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> Although I see it in the link below...
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> What is going on?
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> Issue vanished with a fresh "clone".
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> [Sorry for the noise.]
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> RC1 was cancelled due to some release
> > > steps
> > > > >> were
> > > > >> > > not
> > > > >> > > > > done
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Tag URL:
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > >
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >>
> > >
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=commons-collections.git;a=commit;h=77e37dbf238d26351edb29e95391e3df75095d01
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Commit ID the tag points at:
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > 77e37dbf238d26351edb29e95391e3df75095d01
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Site:
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > >
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >>
> > >
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/4.3-RC2/site/index.html
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> The Clirr report is still a problem:
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > >
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >>
> > >
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/4.3-RC2/site/clirr-report.html
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> [The same errors are reported on my
> > > machine,
> > > > >> so it's
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> not a cache issue...]
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> Regards,
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> Gilles
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Distribution files (committed at
> revision
> > > > >> 31689):
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > >> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Distribution files hashes (SHA256):
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-bin.tar.gz
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > >> > >
> 214c12fae27403f1a16ca6c108b5a8682be1a885a0dbbfc8eb30941303e1fe94
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-bin.zip
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > >> > >
> 75b51a98fea6fca3746a3f70c6a0be24c99849e4976c4649214eaa5a009d0aeb
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-src.tar.gz
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > >> > >
> 399f403feca86dbba7c4162eb90174db45979a2f7db2b3e0ba48240dc43ab434
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-src.zip
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > >> > >
> 1c637e260b5b9e372d196593c7617ad3adedb6da3ac9196d086f9fc24401f5c3
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> KEYS file to check signatures:
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > https://www.apache.org/dist/commons/KEYS
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Maven artifacts:
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > >
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >>
> > >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1405/
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Please select one of the following
> > > options:
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] +1 Release it.
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] +0 Go ahead; I don't care.
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] -0 There are a few minor
> glitches:
> > > ...
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] -1 No, do not release it because
> ...
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> This vote will be open for at least 72
> > > hours,
> > > > >> i.e.
> > > > >> > > > > until
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> 2018-12-29T14:00:00Z
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> (this is UTC time).
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > >> > > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> > > [hidden email]
> > > > >> > > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail:
> > > > >> [hidden email]
> > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > --
> > > > >> > > > > > WBR
> > > > >> > > > > > Maxim aka solomax
> > > > >> > > > >
> > > > >> > > > >
> > > > >>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > >> > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> [hidden email]
> > > > >> > > > > For additional commands, e-mail:
> [hidden email]
> > > > >> > > > >
> > > > >> > > > >
> > > > >> > > >
> > > > >> > > > --
> > > > >> > > > WBR
> > > > >> > > > Maxim aka solomax
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > >> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > > >> > > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > > >> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > WBR
> > > > Maxim aka solomax
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> > WBR
> > Maxim aka solomax
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>

--
WBR
Maxim aka solomax
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE][RC2] Commons collections 4.3

sebb-2-2
On Sat, 19 Jan 2019 at 03:40, Maxim Solodovnik <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Hello All,
>
> Am I right thinking it is OK to add something like
> "Clirr errors reported for this version can be ignored" to release NOTES
> and proceed with VOTE?

Something like that, but IMO it needs to explain why each type of
error is not an issue, rather than a general statement that the report
is wrong.

> If I'm not mistaken after almost a month of voting we have
> Binding:
> 1: +1 (Bruno P. Kinoshita)
> Non-binding:
> 1: +1 (Maxim Solodovnik)
> 1: -1 (Amey Jadiye)
>
> On Sat, 19 Jan 2019 at 08:07, Gilles Sadowski <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Hi.
> >
> > Le ven. 18 janv. 2019 à 18:07, Maxim Solodovnik <[hidden email]> a
> > écrit :
> > >
> > > OK
> > >
> > > here is the test:
> > > https://gist.github.com/solomax/a6fbec6db71bb28dfe53afc566086505
> > > It was compiled using
> > >
> > > java version "1.8.0_201"
> > > Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.8.0_201-b09)
> > > Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM (build 25.201-b09, mixed mode)
> > >
> > > `javac -cp
> > >
> > ~/.m2/repository/org/apache/commons/commons-collections4/4.2/commons-collections4-4.2.jar
> > > src/org/tmp/Test.java`
> > >
> > > It was run with
> > > 1) `java -cp
> > >
> > ~/.m2/repository/org/apache/commons/commons-collections4/4.2/commons-collections4-4.2.jar:src/
> > > org.tmp.Test`
> > > 2) `java -cp
> > >
> > ~/.m2/repository/org/apache/commons/commons-collections4/4.3/commons-collections4-4.3.jar:src/
> > > org.tmp.Test `
> > >
> > > no crash
> >
> > Great. :-)
> > [And let's drop Clirr!]
> >
> > > ps this is the first time I need to write java tests during release
> > process
> >
> > Actually, explaining the Clirr report is a prerequisite...[1]
> > Another way would have been to check out the code at the point before it
> > required Java 8; and see that the version bump was indeed the cause of
> > the spurious errors.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Gilles
> >
> > [1]
> > https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=commons-rng.git;a=blob;f=doc/release/release.howto.txt;h=53f5e77de0aa1afeac151654850a4a26c1f59630;hb=HEAD#l73
> >
> > > ....
> > >
> > > On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 at 22:37, sebb <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > We don't really know why it is being reported as an error.
> > > >
> > > > But what's important is to understand whether the report is valid or
> > not.
> > > >
> > > > The way to check that is to try it out, as noted else-thread:
> > > >
> > > > ---cut here---
> > > > We could also make some definite progress with an actual code
> > > > example that calls the incriminated methods, compiled against the
> > > > current version of the library and then run against the current RC,
> > > > and see whether it crashes.
> > > > ---cut here---
> > > >
> > > > i.e. see what happens if someone updates the library without
> > > > recompiling their code.
> > > >
> > > > Once we have established that the Clirr error is a false positive,
> > > > this can be noted in the release notes.
> > > >
> > > > S.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 at 15:20, Maxim Solodovnik <[hidden email]>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > OK
> > > > >
> > > > > I have checked
> > > > > clirr is the same (comparing to 4.2)
> > > > >
> > > > > I would appreciate is someone can perform detailed analysis here of
> > one
> > > > > error (the first one from here [1])
> > > > >
> > > > > first error is:
> > > > > Message: "Method 'public java.util.Collection values()' has been
> > added to
> > > > > an interface"
> > > > > Class: "org.apache.commons.collections4.BidiMap"
> > > > > Method/Field: "public java.util.Collection values()"
> > > > >
> > > > > BidiMap has method "Set<V> values()" since 4.0 (haven't checked
> > earlier
> > > > > versions),
> > > > > java.util.Set extends java.util.Collection since java6
> > > > > The only thing was changed is "@Override" annotation was added
> > > > >
> > > > > Why is this being reported as error?
> > > > >
> > > > > [1]
> > > > >
> > > >
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/4.3-RC2/site/clirr-report.html
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 at 23:50, Maxim Solodovnik <[hidden email]
> > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > I'll try to double-check if clirr version was changed
> > > > > > So far I believe the issue is caused by java8 update
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Will report back here
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, Jan 17, 2019, 23:39 Gilles Sadowski <[hidden email]
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> Hi.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Le jeu. 17 janv. 2019 à 17:21, Maxim Solodovnik <
> > [hidden email]>
> > > > a
> > > > > >> écrit :
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > It seems to be "stalemate situation"
> > > > > >> > The test wasn't written for a long period of time
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Writing the test would seem to be the best chance.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> What is still not clear to me is whether the previous version
> > > > > >> was released with Clirr errors too.
> > > > > >> If yes, then the question might become: Why ask you to fix
> > > > > >> what was broken before?
> > > > > >> If not, then you could look whether the Clirr version was
> > > > > >> changed in the meantime, and if so, run the older versions
> > > > > >> of the tool until the issue disappears.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> > And there not enough votes to release :(
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> That's an ever more recurring issue within "Commons", and
> > > > > >> the PMC does not seem intent on recognizing it. :-/
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Regards,
> > > > > >> Gilles
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> > On Thu, Jan 17, 2019, 22:59 Gilles Sadowski <
> > [hidden email]
> > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > > Le jeu. 17 janv. 2019 à 16:17, Maxim Solodovnik <
> > > > [hidden email]>
> > > > > >> a
> > > > > >> > > écrit :
> > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > >> > > > Actually I don't get what need to be tested :(
> > > > > >> > > > Can you please provide "textual description" of what need
> > to be
> > > > > >> tested?
> > > > > >> > >
> > > > > >> > > Pasted from below:
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > We could also make some definite progress with an
> > actual
> > > > > >> code
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > example that calls the incriminated methods,
> > compiled
> > > > > >> against the
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > current version of the library and then run against
> > the
> > > > > >> current
> > > > > >> > > RC,
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > and see whether it crashes.
> > > > > >> > >
> > > > > >> > > > Current version works as expected with Java8 application, no
> > > > issues
> > > > > >> > >
> > > > > >> > > Then: Why a new major version?
> > > > > >> > > It looks like sweeping dust under the carpet. ;-)
> > > > > >> > >
> > > > > >> > > If nobody wants to write a test, then we could just release
> > the
> > > > > >> current
> > > > > >> > > RC (with a mention that Clirr signals errors that we chose to
> > > > ignore),
> > > > > >> > > and if someone complains later on (if indeed BC would have
> > been
> > > > > >> broken),
> > > > > >> > > release a bugfix version.
> > > > > >> > >
> > > > > >> > > Regards,
> > > > > >> > > Gilles
> > > > > >> > >
> > > > > >> > > > All current tests are green
> > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > >> > > > On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 at 19:14, Gilles Sadowski <
> > > > [hidden email]
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > > wrote:
> > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > Hello.
> > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > Le jeu. 17 janv. 2019 à 04:24, Maxim Solodovnik <
> > > > > >> [hidden email]>
> > > > > >> > > a
> > > > > >> > > > > écrit :
> > > > > >> > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > Hello All,
> > > > > >> > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > Shall I cancel this VOTE and change project coordinates
> > to
> > > > be
> > > > > >> > > > > > commons-collections5 ?
> > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > I must have missed part of the thread...  IMO, a major
> > > > release is
> > > > > >> not
> > > > > >> > > > > the answer to a possible false positive.
> > > > > >> > > > > Did you make the actual test (mentioned somewhere below)?
> > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > Best regards,
> > > > > >> > > > > Gilles
> > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > On Sat, 5 Jan 2019 at 01:04, Amey Jadiye <
> > > > [hidden email]>
> > > > > >> > > wrote:
> > > > > >> > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > On Fri, 4 Jan 2019, 5:25 pm Gilles <
> > > > > >> [hidden email]
> > > > > >> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >> > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > hi.
> > > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > Hi Gilles,
> > > > > >> > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > On Thu, 3 Jan 2019 22:04:24 +0530, Amey Jadiye
> > wrote:
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Hello Maxim / All
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > I put little more efforts to find out the possible
> > > > cause
> > > > > >> of the
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > error.
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > In the clirr code, I found the reason for this
> > error
> > > > and
> > > > > >> same
> > > > > >> > > is
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > documented
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > in clirr documentation [1].
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > A method declaration has been added to the
> > specified
> > > > > >> interface.
> > > > > >> > > > > This
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > is
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > always reported as a binary-compatibility error,
> > but
> > > > in
> > > > > >> > > practice,
> > > > > >> > > > > the
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > changed class might be used successfully with code
> > > > > >> compiled
> > > > > >> > > against
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > the old
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > interface depending upon usage patterns.
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Old code which invokes methods upon code compiled
> > > > against
> > > > > >> the
> > > > > >> > > new
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > (expanded) interface will continue to work without
> > > > > >> issues. And
> > > > > >> > > old
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > code
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > which implements the old version of the interface
> > will
> > > > > >> also
> > > > > >> > > > > continue
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > to
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > work correctly as long as no code attempts to
> > invoke
> > > > any
> > > > > >> of the
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > newly-added
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > methods against that instance. But the code which
> > > > > >> (validly)
> > > > > >> > > invokes
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > one of
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > the new methods in the interface against an object
> > > > which
> > > > > >> > > implements
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > only
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > the old version of the interface will cause an
> > > > > >> > > AbstractMethodError
> > > > > >> > > > > to
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > be
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > thrown at the time the method invocation is
> > attempted.
> > > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > IIUC, new code that calls the new methods on
> > > > [Collections]
> > > > > >> > > classes
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > will crash.  Does not look good.
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > On the other hand, Maxim wrote earlier that a method
> > > > > >> reported by
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > Clirr as "new" (cf. below) was in fact present since
> > > > Java
> > > > > >> 6...
> > > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > Are we then sure that it's a Clirr bug?
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > If so, why did you not vote "+1" (on the condition
> > that
> > > > the
> > > > > >> false
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > positive is mentioned in the release notes)?
> > > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > We could also make some definite progress with an
> > actual
> > > > > >> code
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > example that calls the incriminated methods,
> > compiled
> > > > > >> against the
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > current version of the library and then run against
> > the
> > > > > >> current
> > > > > >> > > RC,
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > and see whether it crashes.
> > > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > Thanks for directions here, I must also check that.
> > Till
> > > > then
> > > > > >> I
> > > > > >> > > would
> > > > > >> > > > > like
> > > > > >> > > > > > > to change my vote to -1 (Non Binding) for this
> > release.
> > > > > >> > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > Alternatively, we could instate "revapi" in the POM
> > (and
> > > > > >> disable
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > Clirr); and if the report is clean, trust that
> > (though
> > > > > >> "revapi"
> > > > > >> > > is
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > still beta).
> > > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > Opinions?
> > > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > Gilles
> > > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > In 4.2 and 4.3 looks like we have upgraded the
> > java
> > > > > >> version[2]
> > > > > >> > > > > where
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > for
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > example for Map interface might have added a few
> > more
> > > > > >> methods
> > > > > >> > > > > causing
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > these
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > errors.
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > For this release, I am voting 0 (Non-Binding) as
> > > > there is
> > > > > >> > > unharmed
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > mess
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > around the clirr.
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > rest of the things are OK with this release, I
> > would
> > > > > >> encourage
> > > > > >> > > to
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > have
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > revapi replacing clirr.
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > [1]
> > > > > >> http://clirr.sourceforge.net/clirr-core/exegesis.html
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > [2]
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > >> > >
> > > > > >>
> > > >
> > https://github.com/apache/commons-collections/commit/482762a13f739631f94d03642b0a55a9b7214c44
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Amey
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jan 3, 2019 at 11:53 AM Amey Jadiye <
> > > > > >> > > [hidden email]>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> I spared little time on finding issue however
> > didn't
> > > > > >> found it
> > > > > >> > > in
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> clirr(may
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> be hidden somewhere),  today will check if clirr
> > > > maven
> > > > > >> plugin
> > > > > >> > > have
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> any
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> issues. also I saw that few other apache commons
> > > > modules
> > > > > >> > > having
> > > > > >> > > > > same
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> issue
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> and are released.
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> I also gave try on revapi with commons
> > collection4
> > > > > >> 4.3RC2.
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> revapi:check
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> was clean unlike clirr, looks promising to
> > replace
> > > > clirr.
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> Regards,
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> Amey
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> On Wed, 2 Jan 2019, 12:31 pm Maxim Solodovnik <
> > > > > >> > > > > [hidden email]
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> Hello All,
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> Just checked clirr report one more time
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> This time I took 1 error and perform
> > investigation:
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> "Method 'public java.util.Collection values()'
> > has
> > > > been
> > > > > >> > > added to
> > > > > >> > > > > an
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> interface"
> > org.apache.commons.collections4.BidiMap
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> In fact I don't understand why this error was
> > > > reported
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> BidiMap extends java.util.Map
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> Map has method "public java.util.Collection
> > > > values()"
> > > > > >> in all
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> versions:
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > >> https://docs.oracle.com/javase/6/docs/api/java/util/Map.html
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > >> https://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/api/java/util/Map.html
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > >> https://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/api/java/util/Map.html
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> Maybe its clirr issue?
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> Would appreciate any help with this
> > investigation
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> On Mon, 31 Dec 2018 at 16:53, Gilles <
> > > > > >> > > > > [hidden email]>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > On Mon, 31 Dec 2018 07:41:40 +0700, Maxim
> > > > Solodovnik
> > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > > Hello Gilles,
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > > I already did analysis: [1], all errors are
> > > > caused
> > > > > >> by
> > > > > >> > > > > previous
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > > release
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > > 4.3 doesn't introduce any new errors ...
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > > [1]
> > > > https://markmail.org/message/l7ftxlvdk4yqxijt
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > I had seen the post but it says:
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > ---
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > these errors are weird. Above classes has no
> > > > changes
> > > > > >> > > comparing
> > > > > >> > > > > to
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> 4.2
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > ---
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > But IMHO it was not a conclusion: If the
> > cause of
> > > > the
> > > > > >> > > errors
> > > > > >> > > > > was
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > identified, it could have been mentioned in
> > the
> > > > > >> release
> > > > > >> > > notes
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > and/or the [VOTE] email, in order to avoid
> > further
> > > > > >> > > questioning.
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > Is the cause the change of supported JDK?
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > Regards,
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > Gilles
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > > On Mon, 31 Dec 2018 at 07:26, Rob Tompkins <
> > > > > >> > > > > [hidden email]>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > > wrote:
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> I’ll give it a look tonight or in the
> > morning.
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> -Rob
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> > On Dec 30, 2018, at 12:25 AM, Maxim
> > > > Solodovnik
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> > No votes after 3 days :(
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> > Is there anything wrong with the RC?
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> On Thu, 27 Dec 2018 at 05:20, Bruno P.
> > > > Kinoshita
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> FWIW I had a similar experience, and
> > > > realized I
> > > > > >> was
> > > > > >> > > doing
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> `git
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> fetch --all`, but it didn't bring the tags.
> > > > `git
> > > > > >> fetch
> > > > > >> > > > > --tags`
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> did
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> the
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> trick. After that I could `git checkout
> > > > $tag-name`
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> Cheers
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> Bruno
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> ________________________________
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> From: Gilles <
> > [hidden email]>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> To: [hidden email]
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> Sent: Thursday, 27 December 2018 9:26 AM
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> Subject: Re: [VOTE][RC2] Commons
> > > > collections 4.3
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> On Wed, 26 Dec 2018 21:21:34 +0100,
> > Gilles
> > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> Hi.
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> On Wed, 26 Dec 2018 20:41:59 +0700,
> > Maxim
> > > > > >> > > Solodovnik
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> This is a [VOTE] for releasing
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Apache Commons collections 4.3
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Tag name:
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>    collections-4.3-RC2 (signature can
> > be
> > > > > >> checked
> > > > > >> > > from
> > > > > >> > > > > git
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> using
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> 'git
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> tag -v')
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> $ git tag -v collections-4.3-RC2
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> error: tag 'collections-4.3-RC2' not
> > found.
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> Although I see it in the link below...
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> What is going on?
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> Issue vanished with a fresh "clone".
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> [Sorry for the noise.]
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> RC1 was cancelled due to some release
> > > > steps
> > > > > >> were
> > > > > >> > > not
> > > > > >> > > > > done
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Tag URL:
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > >> > >
> > > > > >>
> > > >
> > https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=commons-collections.git;a=commit;h=77e37dbf238d26351edb29e95391e3df75095d01
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Commit ID the tag points at:
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > 77e37dbf238d26351edb29e95391e3df75095d01
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Site:
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > >> > >
> > > > > >>
> > > >
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/4.3-RC2/site/index.html
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> The Clirr report is still a problem:
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > >> > >
> > > > > >>
> > > >
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/4.3-RC2/site/clirr-report.html
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> [The same errors are reported on my
> > > > machine,
> > > > > >> so it's
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> not a cache issue...]
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> Regards,
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> Gilles
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Distribution files (committed at
> > revision
> > > > > >> 31689):
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > >> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Distribution files hashes (SHA256):
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-bin.tar.gz
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > >> > >
> > 214c12fae27403f1a16ca6c108b5a8682be1a885a0dbbfc8eb30941303e1fe94
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-bin.zip
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > >> > >
> > 75b51a98fea6fca3746a3f70c6a0be24c99849e4976c4649214eaa5a009d0aeb
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-src.tar.gz
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > >> > >
> > 399f403feca86dbba7c4162eb90174db45979a2f7db2b3e0ba48240dc43ab434
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-src.zip
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > >> > >
> > 1c637e260b5b9e372d196593c7617ad3adedb6da3ac9196d086f9fc24401f5c3
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> KEYS file to check signatures:
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > https://www.apache.org/dist/commons/KEYS
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Maven artifacts:
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > >> > >
> > > > > >>
> > > >
> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1405/
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Please select one of the following
> > > > options:
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] +1 Release it.
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] +0 Go ahead; I don't care.
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] -0 There are a few minor
> > glitches:
> > > > ...
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] -1 No, do not release it because
> > ...
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> This vote will be open for at least 72
> > > > hours,
> > > > > >> i.e.
> > > > > >> > > > > until
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> 2018-12-29T14:00:00Z
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> (this is UTC time).
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > >
> > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> > > > [hidden email]
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail:
> > > > > >> [hidden email]
> > > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > --
> > > > > >> > > > > > WBR
> > > > > >> > > > > > Maxim aka solomax
> > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > >>
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > >> > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> > [hidden email]
> > > > > >> > > > > For additional commands, e-mail:
> > [hidden email]
> > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > >> > > > --
> > > > > >> > > > WBR
> > > > > >> > > > Maxim aka solomax
> > > > > >> > >
> > > > > >> > >
> > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > >> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > > > >> > > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > > > >> > >
> > > > > >> > >
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > > > >> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > WBR
> > > > > Maxim aka solomax
> > > >
> > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > WBR
> > > Maxim aka solomax
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >
> >
>
> --
> WBR
> Maxim aka solomax

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE][RC2] Commons collections 4.3

Maxim Solodovnik
I'm afraid I need help with this
since I don't understand why clirr reports these errors

On Sat, 19 Jan 2019 at 17:32, sebb <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Sat, 19 Jan 2019 at 03:40, Maxim Solodovnik <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> >
> > Hello All,
> >
> > Am I right thinking it is OK to add something like
> > "Clirr errors reported for this version can be ignored" to release NOTES
> > and proceed with VOTE?
>
> Something like that, but IMO it needs to explain why each type of
> error is not an issue, rather than a general statement that the report
> is wrong.
>
> > If I'm not mistaken after almost a month of voting we have
> > Binding:
> > 1: +1 (Bruno P. Kinoshita)
> > Non-binding:
> > 1: +1 (Maxim Solodovnik)
> > 1: -1 (Amey Jadiye)
> >
> > On Sat, 19 Jan 2019 at 08:07, Gilles Sadowski <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi.
> > >
> > > Le ven. 18 janv. 2019 à 18:07, Maxim Solodovnik <[hidden email]>
> a
> > > écrit :
> > > >
> > > > OK
> > > >
> > > > here is the test:
> > > > https://gist.github.com/solomax/a6fbec6db71bb28dfe53afc566086505
> > > > It was compiled using
> > > >
> > > > java version "1.8.0_201"
> > > > Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.8.0_201-b09)
> > > > Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM (build 25.201-b09, mixed mode)
> > > >
> > > > `javac -cp
> > > >
> > >
> ~/.m2/repository/org/apache/commons/commons-collections4/4.2/commons-collections4-4.2.jar
> > > > src/org/tmp/Test.java`
> > > >
> > > > It was run with
> > > > 1) `java -cp
> > > >
> > >
> ~/.m2/repository/org/apache/commons/commons-collections4/4.2/commons-collections4-4.2.jar:src/
> > > > org.tmp.Test`
> > > > 2) `java -cp
> > > >
> > >
> ~/.m2/repository/org/apache/commons/commons-collections4/4.3/commons-collections4-4.3.jar:src/
> > > > org.tmp.Test `
> > > >
> > > > no crash
> > >
> > > Great. :-)
> > > [And let's drop Clirr!]
> > >
> > > > ps this is the first time I need to write java tests during release
> > > process
> > >
> > > Actually, explaining the Clirr report is a prerequisite...[1]
> > > Another way would have been to check out the code at the point before
> it
> > > required Java 8; and see that the version bump was indeed the cause of
> > > the spurious errors.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Gilles
> > >
> > > [1]
> > >
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=commons-rng.git;a=blob;f=doc/release/release.howto.txt;h=53f5e77de0aa1afeac151654850a4a26c1f59630;hb=HEAD#l73
> > >
> > > > ....
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 at 22:37, sebb <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > We don't really know why it is being reported as an error.
> > > > >
> > > > > But what's important is to understand whether the report is valid
> or
> > > not.
> > > > >
> > > > > The way to check that is to try it out, as noted else-thread:
> > > > >
> > > > > ---cut here---
> > > > > We could also make some definite progress with an actual code
> > > > > example that calls the incriminated methods, compiled against the
> > > > > current version of the library and then run against the current RC,
> > > > > and see whether it crashes.
> > > > > ---cut here---
> > > > >
> > > > > i.e. see what happens if someone updates the library without
> > > > > recompiling their code.
> > > > >
> > > > > Once we have established that the Clirr error is a false positive,
> > > > > this can be noted in the release notes.
> > > > >
> > > > > S.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 at 15:20, Maxim Solodovnik <
> [hidden email]>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > OK
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I have checked
> > > > > > clirr is the same (comparing to 4.2)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I would appreciate is someone can perform detailed analysis here
> of
> > > one
> > > > > > error (the first one from here [1])
> > > > > >
> > > > > > first error is:
> > > > > > Message: "Method 'public java.util.Collection values()' has been
> > > added to
> > > > > > an interface"
> > > > > > Class: "org.apache.commons.collections4.BidiMap"
> > > > > > Method/Field: "public java.util.Collection values()"
> > > > > >
> > > > > > BidiMap has method "Set<V> values()" since 4.0 (haven't checked
> > > earlier
> > > > > > versions),
> > > > > > java.util.Set extends java.util.Collection since java6
> > > > > > The only thing was changed is "@Override" annotation was added
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Why is this being reported as error?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [1]
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/4.3-RC2/site/clirr-report.html
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 at 23:50, Maxim Solodovnik <
> [hidden email]
> > > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > I'll try to double-check if clirr version was changed
> > > > > > > So far I believe the issue is caused by java8 update
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Will report back here
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Thu, Jan 17, 2019, 23:39 Gilles Sadowski <
> [hidden email]
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> Hi.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Le jeu. 17 janv. 2019 à 17:21, Maxim Solodovnik <
> > > [hidden email]>
> > > > > a
> > > > > > >> écrit :
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > It seems to be "stalemate situation"
> > > > > > >> > The test wasn't written for a long period of time
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Writing the test would seem to be the best chance.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> What is still not clear to me is whether the previous version
> > > > > > >> was released with Clirr errors too.
> > > > > > >> If yes, then the question might become: Why ask you to fix
> > > > > > >> what was broken before?
> > > > > > >> If not, then you could look whether the Clirr version was
> > > > > > >> changed in the meantime, and if so, run the older versions
> > > > > > >> of the tool until the issue disappears.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> > And there not enough votes to release :(
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> That's an ever more recurring issue within "Commons", and
> > > > > > >> the PMC does not seem intent on recognizing it. :-/
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Regards,
> > > > > > >> Gilles
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> > On Thu, Jan 17, 2019, 22:59 Gilles Sadowski <
> > > [hidden email]
> > > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > > Le jeu. 17 janv. 2019 à 16:17, Maxim Solodovnik <
> > > > > [hidden email]>
> > > > > > >> a
> > > > > > >> > > écrit :
> > > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > Actually I don't get what need to be tested :(
> > > > > > >> > > > Can you please provide "textual description" of what
> need
> > > to be
> > > > > > >> tested?
> > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > >> > > Pasted from below:
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > We could also make some definite progress with
> an
> > > actual
> > > > > > >> code
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > example that calls the incriminated methods,
> > > compiled
> > > > > > >> against the
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > current version of the library and then run
> against
> > > the
> > > > > > >> current
> > > > > > >> > > RC,
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > and see whether it crashes.
> > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > >> > > > Current version works as expected with Java8
> application, no
> > > > > issues
> > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > >> > > Then: Why a new major version?
> > > > > > >> > > It looks like sweeping dust under the carpet. ;-)
> > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > >> > > If nobody wants to write a test, then we could just
> release
> > > the
> > > > > > >> current
> > > > > > >> > > RC (with a mention that Clirr signals errors that we
> chose to
> > > > > ignore),
> > > > > > >> > > and if someone complains later on (if indeed BC would have
> > > been
> > > > > > >> broken),
> > > > > > >> > > release a bugfix version.
> > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > >> > > Regards,
> > > > > > >> > > Gilles
> > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > >> > > > All current tests are green
> > > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 at 19:14, Gilles Sadowski <
> > > > > [hidden email]
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > > wrote:
> > > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > Hello.
> > > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > Le jeu. 17 janv. 2019 à 04:24, Maxim Solodovnik <
> > > > > > >> [hidden email]>
> > > > > > >> > > a
> > > > > > >> > > > > écrit :
> > > > > > >> > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > Hello All,
> > > > > > >> > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > Shall I cancel this VOTE and change project
> coordinates
> > > to
> > > > > be
> > > > > > >> > > > > > commons-collections5 ?
> > > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > I must have missed part of the thread...  IMO, a major
> > > > > release is
> > > > > > >> not
> > > > > > >> > > > > the answer to a possible false positive.
> > > > > > >> > > > > Did you make the actual test (mentioned somewhere
> below)?
> > > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > Best regards,
> > > > > > >> > > > > Gilles
> > > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > On Sat, 5 Jan 2019 at 01:04, Amey Jadiye <
> > > > > [hidden email]>
> > > > > > >> > > wrote:
> > > > > > >> > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > On Fri, 4 Jan 2019, 5:25 pm Gilles <
> > > > > > >> [hidden email]
> > > > > > >> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > hi.
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > Hi Gilles,
> > > > > > >> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > On Thu, 3 Jan 2019 22:04:24 +0530, Amey Jadiye
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Hello Maxim / All
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > I put little more efforts to find out the
> possible
> > > > > cause
> > > > > > >> of the
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > error.
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > In the clirr code, I found the reason for this
> > > error
> > > > > and
> > > > > > >> same
> > > > > > >> > > is
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > documented
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > in clirr documentation [1].
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > A method declaration has been added to the
> > > specified
> > > > > > >> interface.
> > > > > > >> > > > > This
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > is
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > always reported as a binary-compatibility
> error,
> > > but
> > > > > in
> > > > > > >> > > practice,
> > > > > > >> > > > > the
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > changed class might be used successfully with
> code
> > > > > > >> compiled
> > > > > > >> > > against
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > the old
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > interface depending upon usage patterns.
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Old code which invokes methods upon code
> compiled
> > > > > against
> > > > > > >> the
> > > > > > >> > > new
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > (expanded) interface will continue to work
> without
> > > > > > >> issues. And
> > > > > > >> > > old
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > code
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > which implements the old version of the
> interface
> > > will
> > > > > > >> also
> > > > > > >> > > > > continue
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > work correctly as long as no code attempts to
> > > invoke
> > > > > any
> > > > > > >> of the
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > newly-added
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > methods against that instance. But the code
> which
> > > > > > >> (validly)
> > > > > > >> > > invokes
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > one of
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > the new methods in the interface against an
> object
> > > > > which
> > > > > > >> > > implements
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > only
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > the old version of the interface will cause an
> > > > > > >> > > AbstractMethodError
> > > > > > >> > > > > to
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > be
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > thrown at the time the method invocation is
> > > attempted.
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > IIUC, new code that calls the new methods on
> > > > > [Collections]
> > > > > > >> > > classes
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > will crash.  Does not look good.
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > On the other hand, Maxim wrote earlier that a
> method
> > > > > > >> reported by
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Clirr as "new" (cf. below) was in fact present
> since
> > > > > Java
> > > > > > >> 6...
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Are we then sure that it's a Clirr bug?
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > If so, why did you not vote "+1" (on the
> condition
> > > that
> > > > > the
> > > > > > >> false
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > positive is mentioned in the release notes)?
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > We could also make some definite progress with
> an
> > > actual
> > > > > > >> code
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > example that calls the incriminated methods,
> > > compiled
> > > > > > >> against the
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > current version of the library and then run
> against
> > > the
> > > > > > >> current
> > > > > > >> > > RC,
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > and see whether it crashes.
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > Thanks for directions here, I must also check
> that.
> > > Till
> > > > > then
> > > > > > >> I
> > > > > > >> > > would
> > > > > > >> > > > > like
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > to change my vote to -1 (Non Binding) for this
> > > release.
> > > > > > >> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Alternatively, we could instate "revapi" in the
> POM
> > > (and
> > > > > > >> disable
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Clirr); and if the report is clean, trust that
> > > (though
> > > > > > >> "revapi"
> > > > > > >> > > is
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > still beta).
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Opinions?
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Gilles
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > In 4.2 and 4.3 looks like we have upgraded the
> > > java
> > > > > > >> version[2]
> > > > > > >> > > > > where
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > for
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > example for Map interface might have added a
> few
> > > more
> > > > > > >> methods
> > > > > > >> > > > > causing
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > these
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > errors.
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > For this release, I am voting 0 (Non-Binding)
> as
> > > > > there is
> > > > > > >> > > unharmed
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > mess
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > around the clirr.
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > rest of the things are OK with this release, I
> > > would
> > > > > > >> encourage
> > > > > > >> > > to
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > have
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > revapi replacing clirr.
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > [1]
> > > > > > >> http://clirr.sourceforge.net/clirr-core/exegesis.html
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > [2]
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > >>
> > > > >
> > >
> https://github.com/apache/commons-collections/commit/482762a13f739631f94d03642b0a55a9b7214c44
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Amey
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jan 3, 2019 at 11:53 AM Amey Jadiye <
> > > > > > >> > > [hidden email]>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> I spared little time on finding issue however
> > > didn't
> > > > > > >> found it
> > > > > > >> > > in
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> clirr(may
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> be hidden somewhere),  today will check if
> clirr
> > > > > maven
> > > > > > >> plugin
> > > > > > >> > > have
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> any
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> issues. also I saw that few other apache
> commons
> > > > > modules
> > > > > > >> > > having
> > > > > > >> > > > > same
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> issue
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> and are released.
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> I also gave try on revapi with commons
> > > collection4
> > > > > > >> 4.3RC2.
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> revapi:check
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> was clean unlike clirr, looks promising to
> > > replace
> > > > > clirr.
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> Regards,
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> Amey
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> On Wed, 2 Jan 2019, 12:31 pm Maxim
> Solodovnik <
> > > > > > >> > > > > [hidden email]
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> Hello All,
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> Just checked clirr report one more time
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> This time I took 1 error and perform
> > > investigation:
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> "Method 'public java.util.Collection
> values()'
> > > has
> > > > > been
> > > > > > >> > > added to
> > > > > > >> > > > > an
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> interface"
> > > org.apache.commons.collections4.BidiMap
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> In fact I don't understand why this error
> was
> > > > > reported
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> BidiMap extends java.util.Map
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> Map has method "public java.util.Collection
> > > > > values()"
> > > > > > >> in all
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> versions:
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >> https://docs.oracle.com/javase/6/docs/api/java/util/Map.html
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >> https://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/api/java/util/Map.html
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >> https://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/api/java/util/Map.html
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> Maybe its clirr issue?
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> Would appreciate any help with this
> > > investigation
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> On Mon, 31 Dec 2018 at 16:53, Gilles <
> > > > > > >> > > > > [hidden email]>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > On Mon, 31 Dec 2018 07:41:40 +0700, Maxim
> > > > > Solodovnik
> > > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > > Hello Gilles,
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > > I already did analysis: [1], all errors
> are
> > > > > caused
> > > > > > >> by
> > > > > > >> > > > > previous
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > > release
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > > 4.3 doesn't introduce any new errors ...
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > > [1]
> > > > > https://markmail.org/message/l7ftxlvdk4yqxijt
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > I had seen the post but it says:
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > ---
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > these errors are weird. Above classes has
> no
> > > > > changes
> > > > > > >> > > comparing
> > > > > > >> > > > > to
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> 4.2
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > ---
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > But IMHO it was not a conclusion: If the
> > > cause of
> > > > > the
> > > > > > >> > > errors
> > > > > > >> > > > > was
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > identified, it could have been mentioned
> in
> > > the
> > > > > > >> release
> > > > > > >> > > notes
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > and/or the [VOTE] email, in order to avoid
> > > further
> > > > > > >> > > questioning.
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > Is the cause the change of supported JDK?
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > Regards,
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > Gilles
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > > On Mon, 31 Dec 2018 at 07:26, Rob
> Tompkins <
> > > > > > >> > > > > [hidden email]>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > > wrote:
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> I’ll give it a look tonight or in the
> > > morning.
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> -Rob
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> > On Dec 30, 2018, at 12:25 AM, Maxim
> > > > > Solodovnik
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> > No votes after 3 days :(
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> > Is there anything wrong with the RC?
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> On Thu, 27 Dec 2018 at 05:20, Bruno
> P.
> > > > > Kinoshita
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> FWIW I had a similar experience, and
> > > > > realized I
> > > > > > >> was
> > > > > > >> > > doing
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> `git
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> fetch --all`, but it didn't bring the
> tags.
> > > > > `git
> > > > > > >> fetch
> > > > > > >> > > > > --tags`
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> did
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> the
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> trick. After that I could `git checkout
> > > > > $tag-name`
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> Cheers
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> Bruno
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> ________________________________
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> From: Gilles <
> > > [hidden email]>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> To: [hidden email]
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> Sent: Thursday, 27 December 2018
> 9:26 AM
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> Subject: Re: [VOTE][RC2] Commons
> > > > > collections 4.3
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> On Wed, 26 Dec 2018 21:21:34 +0100,
> > > Gilles
> > > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> Hi.
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> On Wed, 26 Dec 2018 20:41:59
> +0700,
> > > Maxim
> > > > > > >> > > Solodovnik
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> This is a [VOTE] for releasing
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Apache Commons collections 4.3
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Tag name:
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>    collections-4.3-RC2 (signature
> can
> > > be
> > > > > > >> checked
> > > > > > >> > > from
> > > > > > >> > > > > git
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> using
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> 'git
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> tag -v')
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> $ git tag -v collections-4.3-RC2
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> error: tag 'collections-4.3-RC2'
> not
> > > found.
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> Although I see it in the link
> below...
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> What is going on?
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> Issue vanished with a fresh "clone".
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> [Sorry for the noise.]
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> RC1 was cancelled due to some
> release
> > > > > steps
> > > > > > >> were
> > > > > > >> > > not
> > > > > > >> > > > > done
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Tag URL:
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > >>
> > > > >
> > >
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=commons-collections.git;a=commit;h=77e37dbf238d26351edb29e95391e3df75095d01
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Commit ID the tag points at:
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > 77e37dbf238d26351edb29e95391e3df75095d01
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Site:
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > >>
> > > > >
> > >
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/4.3-RC2/site/index.html
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> The Clirr report is still a
> problem:
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > >>
> > > > >
> > >
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/4.3-RC2/site/clirr-report.html
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> [The same errors are reported on my
> > > > > machine,
> > > > > > >> so it's
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> not a cache issue...]
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> Regards,
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> Gilles
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Distribution files (committed at
> > > revision
> > > > > > >> 31689):
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Distribution files hashes
> (SHA256):
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> commons-collections4-4.3-bin.tar.gz
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >> > >
> > > 214c12fae27403f1a16ca6c108b5a8682be1a885a0dbbfc8eb30941303e1fe94
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-bin.zip
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >> > >
> > > 75b51a98fea6fca3746a3f70c6a0be24c99849e4976c4649214eaa5a009d0aeb
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> commons-collections4-4.3-src.tar.gz
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >> > >
> > > 399f403feca86dbba7c4162eb90174db45979a2f7db2b3e0ba48240dc43ab434
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  commons-collections4-4.3-src.zip
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >> > >
> > > 1c637e260b5b9e372d196593c7617ad3adedb6da3ac9196d086f9fc24401f5c3
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> KEYS file to check signatures:
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > https://www.apache.org/dist/commons/KEYS
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Maven artifacts:
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > >>
> > > > >
> > >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1405/
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Please select one of the following
> > > > > options:
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] +1 Release it.
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] +0 Go ahead; I don't care.
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] -0 There are a few minor
> > > glitches:
> > > > > ...
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>  [ ] -1 No, do not release it
> because
> > > ...
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> This vote will be open for at
> least 72
> > > > > hours,
> > > > > > >> i.e.
> > > > > > >> > > > > until
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> 2018-12-29T14:00:00Z
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> (this is UTC time).
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > >
> > > > >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> > > > > [hidden email]
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail:
> > > > > > >> [hidden email]
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > --
> > > > > > >> > > > > > WBR
> > > > > > >> > > > > > Maxim aka solomax
> > > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > > >>
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > >> > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> > > [hidden email]
> > > > > > >> > > > > For additional commands, e-mail:
> > > [hidden email]
> > > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > --
> > > > > > >> > > > WBR
> > > > > > >> > > > Maxim aka solomax
> > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > >> > >
> > > > >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > >> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> [hidden email]
> > > > > > >> > > For additional commands, e-mail:
> [hidden email]
> > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > > > > >> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > WBR
> > > > > > Maxim aka solomax
> > > > >
> > > > >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > WBR
> > > > Maxim aka solomax
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> > WBR
> > Maxim aka solomax
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>

--
WBR
Maxim aka solomax
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE][RC2] Commons collections 4.3

Gilles Sadowski-2
Hi.

Le sam. 19 janv. 2019 à 11:36, Maxim Solodovnik <[hidden email]> a écrit :
>
> I'm afraid I need help with this
> since I don't understand why clirr reports these errors

Nobody knows around here; but your test demonstrates that one of the
errors is a false positive.
So I suggest that, for good measure, you add calls to all the methods
reported by Clirr; then the release notes can rightly mention something
like: "An integration test (<short description of what you've done and/or
a link to this discussion>) has shown that the errors mentioned in the
Clirr report are false positives."

Best regards,
Gilles


> > [...]

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE][RC2] Commons collections 4.3

Maxim Solodovnik
I can see there is activity with replacing clirr with japicmp, maybe it
worth to hold this release until commons-parent v48 will be released?

On Sun, 20 Jan 2019 at 05:52, Gilles Sadowski <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi.
>
> Le sam. 19 janv. 2019 à 11:36, Maxim Solodovnik <[hidden email]> a
> écrit :
> >
> > I'm afraid I need help with this
> > since I don't understand why clirr reports these errors
>
> Nobody knows around here; but your test demonstrates that one of the
> errors is a false positive.
> So I suggest that, for good measure, you add calls to all the methods
> reported by Clirr; then the release notes can rightly mention something
> like: "An integration test (<short description of what you've done and/or
> a link to this discussion>) has shown that the errors mentioned in the
> Clirr report are false positives."
>
> Best regards,
> Gilles
>
>
> > > [...]
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>

--
WBR
Maxim aka solomax
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE][RC2] Commons collections 4.3

Gilles Sadowski-2
Le dim. 20 janv. 2019 à 04:56, Maxim Solodovnik <[hidden email]> a écrit :
>
> I can see there is activity with replacing clirr with japicmp, maybe it
> worth to hold this release until commons-parent v48 will be released?

You are the manager. :-)

Gilles

>
> On Sun, 20 Jan 2019 at 05:52, Gilles Sadowski <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Hi.
> >
> > Le sam. 19 janv. 2019 à 11:36, Maxim Solodovnik <[hidden email]> a
> > écrit :
> > >
> > > I'm afraid I need help with this
> > > since I don't understand why clirr reports these errors
> >
> > Nobody knows around here; but your test demonstrates that one of the
> > errors is a false positive.
> > So I suggest that, for good measure, you add calls to all the methods
> > reported by Clirr; then the release notes can rightly mention something
> > like: "An integration test (<short description of what you've done and/or
> > a link to this discussion>) has shown that the errors mentioned in the
> > Clirr report are false positives."
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Gilles
> >
> >
> > > > [...]
> >
>
> --
> WBR
> Maxim aka solomax

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

1234