Mailing List Archive

SUCCESS! [1:11:30.037919]

+1. Thanks, Chris!

On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 8:53?AM Chris Hegarty
<christopher.hegarty@elastic.co.invalid> wrote:

> Hi,
>
>
> Please vote for release candidate 1 for Lucene 9.9.0
>
>
> The artifacts can be downloaded from:
>
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/lucene/lucene-9.9.0-RC1-rev-92a5e5b02e0e083126c4122f2b7a02426c21a037
>
>
> You can run the smoke tester directly with this command:
>
>
> python3 -u dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py \
>
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/lucene/lucene-9.9.0-RC1-rev-92a5e5b02e0e083126c4122f2b7a02426c21a037
>
>
> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours, and given the weekend in
> between, let’s it open until 2023-12-04 12:00 UTC.
>
>
> [ ] +1 approve
>
> [ ] +0 no opinion
>
> [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
>
>
> Here is my +1
>
>
> Draft release highlights can be viewed here (comments and feedback
> welcome):
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/LUCENE/ReleaseNote9_9_0
>
> -Chris.
>

SUCCESS! [1:03:54.880200]

+1. Thank you Chris!

On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 8:45?PM Nhat Nguyen <nhat.nguyen@elastic.co.invalid>
wrote:

> SUCCESS! [1:11:30.037919]
>
> +1. Thanks, Chris!
>
> On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 8:53?AM Chris Hegarty
> <christopher.hegarty@elastic.co.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>>
>> Please vote for release candidate 1 for Lucene 9.9.0
>>
>>
>> The artifacts can be downloaded from:
>>
>>
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/lucene/lucene-9.9.0-RC1-rev-92a5e5b02e0e083126c4122f2b7a02426c21a037
>>
>>
>> You can run the smoke tester directly with this command:
>>
>>
>> python3 -u dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py \
>>
>>
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/lucene/lucene-9.9.0-RC1-rev-92a5e5b02e0e083126c4122f2b7a02426c21a037
>>
>>
>> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours, and given the weekend in
>> between, let’s it open until 2023-12-04 12:00 UTC.
>>
>>
>> [ ] +1 approve
>>
>> [ ] +0 no opinion
>>
>> [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
>>
>>
>> Here is my +1
>>
>>
>> Draft release highlights can be viewed here (comments and feedback
>> welcome):
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/LUCENE/ReleaseNote9_9_0
>>
>> -Chris.
>>
>

+1 to release.

I hit a corner-case test failure and opened a PR to fix it:
https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/12859

I don't think this should block the release? -- it looks exotic.

Thanks Chris!

Mike McCandless

http://blog.mikemccandless.com


On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 1:16?AM Patrick Zhai <zhai7631@gmail.com> wrote:

> SUCCESS! [1:03:54.880200]
>
> +1. Thank you Chris!
>
> On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 8:45?PM Nhat Nguyen <nhat.nguyen@elastic.co.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>> SUCCESS! [1:11:30.037919]
>>
>> +1. Thanks, Chris!
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 8:53?AM Chris Hegarty
>> <christopher.hegarty@elastic.co.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>>
>>> Please vote for release candidate 1 for Lucene 9.9.0
>>>
>>>
>>> The artifacts can be downloaded from:
>>>
>>>
>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/lucene/lucene-9.9.0-RC1-rev-92a5e5b02e0e083126c4122f2b7a02426c21a037
>>>
>>>
>>> You can run the smoke tester directly with this command:
>>>
>>>
>>> python3 -u dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py \
>>>
>>>
>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/lucene/lucene-9.9.0-RC1-rev-92a5e5b02e0e083126c4122f2b7a02426c21a037
>>>
>>>
>>> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours, and given the weekend in
>>> between, let’s it open until 2023-12-04 12:00 UTC.
>>>
>>>
>>> [ ] +1 approve
>>>
>>> [ ] +0 no opinion
>>>
>>> [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
>>>
>>>
>>> Here is my +1
>>>
>>>
>>> Draft release highlights can be viewed here (comments and feedback
>>> welcome):
>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/LUCENE/ReleaseNote9_9_0
>>>
>>> -Chris.
>>>
>>

SUCCESS! [0:52:59.891964]


+1

On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 12:42?PM Michael McCandless <
lucene@mikemccandless.com> wrote:

> +1 to release.
>
> I hit a corner-case test failure and opened a PR to fix it:
> https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/12859
>
> I don't think this should block the release? -- it looks exotic.
>
> Thanks Chris!
>
> Mike McCandless
>
> http://blog.mikemccandless.com
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 1:16?AM Patrick Zhai <zhai7631@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> SUCCESS! [1:03:54.880200]
>>
>> +1. Thank you Chris!
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 8:45?PM Nhat Nguyen
>> <nhat.nguyen@elastic.co.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> SUCCESS! [1:11:30.037919]
>>>
>>> +1. Thanks, Chris!
>>>
>>> On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 8:53?AM Chris Hegarty
>>> <christopher.hegarty@elastic.co.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Please vote for release candidate 1 for Lucene 9.9.0
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The artifacts can be downloaded from:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/lucene/lucene-9.9.0-RC1-rev-92a5e5b02e0e083126c4122f2b7a02426c21a037
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You can run the smoke tester directly with this command:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> python3 -u dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py \
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/lucene/lucene-9.9.0-RC1-rev-92a5e5b02e0e083126c4122f2b7a02426c21a037
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours, and given the weekend in
>>>> between, let’s it open until 2023-12-04 12:00 UTC.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [ ] +1 approve
>>>>
>>>> [ ] +0 no opinion
>>>>
>>>> [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Here is my +1
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Draft release highlights can be viewed here (comments and feedback
>>>> welcome):
>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/LUCENE/ReleaseNote9_9_0
>>>>
>>>> -Chris.
>>>>
>>>

SUCCESS! [0:47:11.013106]

+1

On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 7:16?AM Ignacio Vera <iverase@gmail.com> wrote:

> SUCCESS! [0:52:59.891964]
>
>
> +1
>
> On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 12:42?PM Michael McCandless <
> lucene@mikemccandless.com> wrote:
>
>> +1 to release.
>>
>> I hit a corner-case test failure and opened a PR to fix it:
>> https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/12859
>>
>> I don't think this should block the release? -- it looks exotic.
>>
>> Thanks Chris!
>>
>> Mike McCandless
>>
>> http://blog.mikemccandless.com
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 1:16?AM Patrick Zhai <zhai7631@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> SUCCESS! [1:03:54.880200]
>>>
>>> +1. Thank you Chris!
>>>
>>> On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 8:45?PM Nhat Nguyen
>>> <nhat.nguyen@elastic.co.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> SUCCESS! [1:11:30.037919]
>>>>
>>>> +1. Thanks, Chris!
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 8:53?AM Chris Hegarty
>>>> <christopher.hegarty@elastic.co.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Please vote for release candidate 1 for Lucene 9.9.0
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The artifacts can be downloaded from:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/lucene/lucene-9.9.0-RC1-rev-92a5e5b02e0e083126c4122f2b7a02426c21a037
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> You can run the smoke tester directly with this command:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> python3 -u dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py \
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/lucene/lucene-9.9.0-RC1-rev-92a5e5b02e0e083126c4122f2b7a02426c21a037
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours, and given the weekend in
>>>>> between, let’s it open until 2023-12-04 12:00 UTC.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> [ ] +1 approve
>>>>>
>>>>> [ ] +0 no opinion
>>>>>
>>>>> [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Here is my +1
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Draft release highlights can be viewed here (comments and feedback
>>>>> welcome):
>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/LUCENE/ReleaseNote9_9_0
>>>>>
>>>>> -Chris.
>>>>>
>>>>

Hi Mike,

> On 30 Nov 2023, at 11:41, Michael McCandless <lucene@mikemccandless.com> wrote:
>
> +1 to release.
>
> I hit a corner-case test failure and opened a PR to fix it: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/12859

Good find! It looks like the fix for this issue is well in hand - great.

> I don't think this should block the release? -- it looks exotic.

I’m not sure how likely this bug is to show in real (non-test) scenarios, but it does look kinda “exotic” to me too. So unless there are counter arguments, I do not see it as critical, and therefore not needing a respin.

-Chris.

>
> Thanks Chris!
>
> Mike McCandless
>
> http://blog.mikemccandless.com <http://blog.mikemccandless.com/>
>
> On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 1:16?AM Patrick Zhai <zhai7631@gmail.com <mailto:zhai7631@gmail.com>> wrote:
>> SUCCESS! [1:03:54.880200]
>>
>> +1. Thank you Chris!
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 8:45?PM Nhat Nguyen <nhat.nguyen@elastic.co.invalid> wrote:
>>> SUCCESS! [1:11:30.037919]
>>>
>>> +1. Thanks, Chris!
>>>
>>> On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 8:53?AM Chris Hegarty <christopher.hegarty@elastic.co.invalid> wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Please vote for release candidate 1 for Lucene 9.9.0
>>>>
>>>> The artifacts can be downloaded from:
>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/lucene/lucene-9.9.0-RC1-rev-92a5e5b02e0e083126c4122f2b7a02426c21a037
>>>>
>>>> You can run the smoke tester directly with this command:
>>>>
>>>> python3 -u dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py \
>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/lucene/lucene-9.9.0-RC1-rev-92a5e5b02e0e083126c4122f2b7a02426c21a037
>>>>
>>>> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours, and given the weekend in between, let’s it open until 2023-12-04 12:00 UTC.
>>>>
>>>> [ ] +1 approve
>>>> [ ] +0 no opinion
>>>> [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
>>>>
>>>> Here is my +1
>>>>
>>>> Draft release highlights can be viewed here (comments and feedback welcome):
>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/LUCENE/ReleaseNote9_9_0
>>>>
>>>> -Chris.

SUCCESS! [0:33:10.432870]

+1

On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 2:59?PM Chris Hegarty
<christopher.hegarty@elastic.co.invalid> wrote:

> Hi Mike,
>
> On 30 Nov 2023, at 11:41, Michael McCandless <lucene@mikemccandless.com>
> wrote:
>
> +1 to release.
>
> I hit a corner-case test failure and opened a PR to fix it:
> https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/12859
>
>
> Good find! It looks like the fix for this issue is well in hand - great.
>
> I don't think this should block the release? -- it looks exotic.
>
>
> I’m not sure how likely this bug is to show in real (non-test) scenarios,
> but it does look kinda “exotic” to me too. So unless there are counter
> arguments, I do not see it as critical, and therefore not needing a respin.
>
> -Chris.
>
>
> Thanks Chris!
>
> Mike McCandless
>
> http://blog.mikemccandless.com
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 1:16?AM Patrick Zhai <zhai7631@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> SUCCESS! [1:03:54.880200]
>>
>> +1. Thank you Chris!
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 8:45?PM Nhat Nguyen
>> <nhat.nguyen@elastic.co.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> SUCCESS! [1:11:30.037919]
>>>
>>> +1. Thanks, Chris!
>>>
>>> On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 8:53?AM Chris Hegarty
>>> <christopher.hegarty@elastic.co.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Please vote for release candidate 1 for Lucene 9.9.0
>>>>
>>>> The artifacts can be downloaded from:
>>>>
>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/lucene/lucene-9.9.0-RC1-rev-92a5e5b02e0e083126c4122f2b7a02426c21a037
>>>>
>>>> You can run the smoke tester directly with this command:
>>>>
>>>> python3 -u dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py \
>>>>
>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/lucene/lucene-9.9.0-RC1-rev-92a5e5b02e0e083126c4122f2b7a02426c21a037
>>>>
>>>> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours, and given the weekend in
>>>> between, let’s it open until 2023-12-04 12:00 UTC.
>>>>
>>>> [ ] +1 approve
>>>> [ ] +0 no opinion
>>>> [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
>>>>
>>>> Here is my +1
>>>>
>>>> Draft release highlights can be viewed here (comments and feedback
>>>> welcome):
>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/LUCENE/ReleaseNote9_9_0
>>>>
>>>> -Chris.
>>>>
>>>
>

Yet another bug due to ghost fields. :( Thanks for fixing! For reference, I
checked how postings work on SlowCompositeCodecReaderWrapper, since they
are prone to ghost fields as well, and they seem to be ok.

I worry that it could actually occur in practice when enabling recursive
graph bisection, so I would prefer to respin.

On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 6:01?AM Luca Cavanna <luca@elastic.co.invalid>
wrote:

> SUCCESS! [0:33:10.432870]
>
> +1
>
> On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 2:59?PM Chris Hegarty
> <christopher.hegarty@elastic.co.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Hi Mike,
>>
>> On 30 Nov 2023, at 11:41, Michael McCandless <lucene@mikemccandless.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> +1 to release.
>>
>> I hit a corner-case test failure and opened a PR to fix it:
>> https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/12859
>>
>>
>> Good find! It looks like the fix for this issue is well in hand - great.
>>
>> I don't think this should block the release? -- it looks exotic.
>>
>>
>> I’m not sure how likely this bug is to show in real (non-test) scenarios,
>> but it does look kinda “exotic” to me too. So unless there are counter
>> arguments, I do not see it as critical, and therefore not needing a respin.
>>
>> -Chris.
>>
>>
>> Thanks Chris!
>>
>> Mike McCandless
>>
>> http://blog.mikemccandless.com
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 1:16?AM Patrick Zhai <zhai7631@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> SUCCESS! [1:03:54.880200]
>>>
>>> +1. Thank you Chris!
>>>
>>> On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 8:45?PM Nhat Nguyen
>>> <nhat.nguyen@elastic.co.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> SUCCESS! [1:11:30.037919]
>>>>
>>>> +1. Thanks, Chris!
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 8:53?AM Chris Hegarty
>>>> <christopher.hegarty@elastic.co.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> Please vote for release candidate 1 for Lucene 9.9.0
>>>>>
>>>>> The artifacts can be downloaded from:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/lucene/lucene-9.9.0-RC1-rev-92a5e5b02e0e083126c4122f2b7a02426c21a037
>>>>>
>>>>> You can run the smoke tester directly with this command:
>>>>>
>>>>> python3 -u dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py \
>>>>>
>>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/lucene/lucene-9.9.0-RC1-rev-92a5e5b02e0e083126c4122f2b7a02426c21a037
>>>>>
>>>>> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours, and given the weekend in
>>>>> between, let’s it open until 2023-12-04 12:00 UTC.
>>>>>
>>>>> [ ] +1 approve
>>>>> [ ] +0 no opinion
>>>>> [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
>>>>>
>>>>> Here is my +1
>>>>>
>>>>> Draft release highlights can be viewed here (comments and feedback
>>>>> welcome):
>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/LUCENE/ReleaseNote9_9_0
>>>>>
>>>>> -Chris.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>

--
Adrien

Adrien,

> On 30 Nov 2023, at 14:51, Adrien Grand <jpountz@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Yet another bug due to ghost fields. :( Thanks for fixing! For reference, I checked how postings work on SlowCompositeCodecReaderWrapper, since they are prone to ghost fields as well, and they seem to be ok.

Thanks for checking this Adrien.

> I worry that it could actually occur in practice when enabling recursive graph bisection, so I would prefer to respin.

Since the change has already been merged to branch_9_9 (thanks Mike), I’ll start an RC2 build right away, and post a notice when it is done.

-Chris.

P.S. I’m less sure about this, but the RC 2 starts a 72hr voting time again? (Just so I know what TTL to put on that)

> On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 6:01?AM Luca Cavanna <luca@elastic.co.invalid> wrote:
>> SUCCESS! [0:33:10.432870]
>>
>> +1
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 2:59?PM Chris Hegarty <christopher.hegarty@elastic.co.invalid> wrote:
>>> Hi Mike,
>>>
>>>> On 30 Nov 2023, at 11:41, Michael McCandless <lucene@mikemccandless.com <mailto:lucene@mikemccandless.com>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> +1 to release.
>>>>
>>>> I hit a corner-case test failure and opened a PR to fix it: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/12859
>>>
>>> Good find! It looks like the fix for this issue is well in hand - great.
>>>
>>>> I don't think this should block the release? -- it looks exotic.
>>>
>>> I’m not sure how likely this bug is to show in real (non-test) scenarios, but it does look kinda “exotic” to me too. So unless there are counter arguments, I do not see it as critical, and therefore not needing a respin.
>>>
>>> -Chris.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks Chris!
>>>>
>>>> Mike McCandless
>>>>
>>>> http://blog.mikemccandless.com <http://blog.mikemccandless.com/>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 1:16?AM Patrick Zhai <zhai7631@gmail.com <mailto:zhai7631@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>> SUCCESS! [1:03:54.880200]
>>>>>
>>>>> +1. Thank you Chris!
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 8:45?PM Nhat Nguyen <nhat.nguyen@elastic.co.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>> SUCCESS! [1:11:30.037919]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> +1. Thanks, Chris!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 8:53?AM Chris Hegarty <christopher.hegarty@elastic.co.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Please vote for release candidate 1 for Lucene 9.9.0
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The artifacts can be downloaded from:
>>>>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/lucene/lucene-9.9.0-RC1-rev-92a5e5b02e0e083126c4122f2b7a02426c21a037
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You can run the smoke tester directly with this command:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> python3 -u dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py \
>>>>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/lucene/lucene-9.9.0-RC1-rev-92a5e5b02e0e083126c4122f2b7a02426c21a037
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours, and given the weekend in between, let’s it open until 2023-12-04 12:00 UTC.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [ ] +1 approve
>>>>>>> [ ] +0 no opinion
>>>>>>> [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Here is my +1
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Draft release highlights can be viewed here (comments and feedback welcome):
>>>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/LUCENE/ReleaseNote9_9_0
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -Chris.
>>>
>
>
> --
> Adrien

On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 9:56?AM Chris Hegarty
<christopher.hegarty@elastic.co.invalid> wrote:

P.S. I’m less sure about this, but the RC 2 starts a 72hr voting time
> again? (Just so I know what TTL to put on that)
>

Yeah a new 72 hour clock starts with each new RC :)

Mike McCandless

http://blog.mikemccandless.com

for the sake of posterity, I did get a successful smoketest:

SUCCESS! [1:00:06.512261]

but +0 to release I guess since it's moot...

On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 10:38?AM Michael McCandless <
lucene@mikemccandless.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 9:56?AM Chris Hegarty
> <christopher.hegarty@elastic.co.invalid> wrote:
>
> P.S. I’m less sure about this, but the RC 2 starts a 72hr voting time
>> again? (Just so I know what TTL to put on that)
>>
>
> Yeah a new 72 hour clock starts with each new RC :)
>
> Mike McCandless
>
> http://blog.mikemccandless.com
>

If we're spinning a new RC, I'd like to ask this group if it would make
sense to pull this very small method deprecation in:
https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/12854

If there's a chance we don't release a 9.10 and go directly to 10.0, this
would be our last opportunity to mark it deprecated on a 9.x version so we
can actually remove it in 10.0. It's really minor though, so I don't want
to create churn, but if we can get it into 9.9 without much issue, it would
be nice. If folks agree, I can get it merged onto 9.9.

Cheers,
-Greg

On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 7:58?AM Michael Sokolov <msokolov@gmail.com> wrote:

> for the sake of posterity, I did get a successful smoketest:
>
> SUCCESS! [1:00:06.512261]
>
> but +0 to release I guess since it's moot...
>
> On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 10:38?AM Michael McCandless <
> lucene@mikemccandless.com> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 9:56?AM Chris Hegarty
>> <christopher.hegarty@elastic.co.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> P.S. I’m less sure about this, but the RC 2 starts a 72hr voting time
>>> again? (Just so I know what TTL to put on that)
>>>
>>
>> Yeah a new 72 hour clock starts with each new RC :)
>>
>> Mike McCandless
>>
>> http://blog.mikemccandless.com
>>
>

For clarity, consider this vote cancelled. A new vote has been started on an RC2 build.

> On 30 Nov 2023, at 16:22, Greg Miller <gsmiller@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> If we're spinning a new RC, I'd like to ask this group if it would make sense to pull this very small method deprecation in: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/12854
>
> If there's a chance we don't release a 9.10 and go directly to 10.0, this would be our last opportunity to mark it deprecated on a 9.x version so we can actually remove it in 10.0. It's really minor though, so I don't want to create churn, but if we can get it into 9.9 without much issue, it would be nice. If folks agree, I can get it merged onto 9.9.

Thanks for raising the issue. I don’t have a strong opinion on whether or not to do the deprecation in this release, and since you say that it is minor, then I don’t see that it necessitates another respin.

Since I had already started an RC2 build, then I just continued with it (and since the above issue is not yet reviewed ). If others feel like the deprecation should absolutely be in, then we can do an RC3.

-Chris.

> Cheers,
> -Greg
>
> On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 7:58?AM Michael Sokolov <msokolov@gmail.com <mailto:msokolov@gmail.com>> wrote:
>> for the sake of posterity, I did get a successful smoketest:
>>
>> SUCCESS! [1:00:06.512261]
>>
>> but +0 to release I guess since it's moot...
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 10:38?AM Michael McCandless <lucene@mikemccandless.com <mailto:lucene@mikemccandless.com>> wrote:
>>> On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 9:56?AM Chris Hegarty <christopher.hegarty@elastic.co.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> P.S. I’m less sure about this, but the RC 2 starts a 72hr voting time again? (Just so I know what TTL to put on that)
>>>
>>> Yeah a new 72 hour clock starts with each new RC :)
>>>
>>> Mike McCandless
>>>
>>> http://blog.mikemccandless.com <http://blog.mikemccandless.com/>

OK, great. I wanted to post a +1 already. Will wait for 2nd RC.

Uwe

Am 30.11.2023 um 16:38 schrieb Michael McCandless:
> On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 9:56?AM Chris Hegarty
> <christopher.hegarty@elastic.co.invalid> wrote:
>
> P.S. I’m less sure about this, but the RC 2 starts a 72hr voting
> time again? (Just so I know what TTL to put on that)
>
>
> Yeah a new 72 hour clock starts with each new RC :)
>
> Mike McCandless
>
> http://blog.mikemccandless.com

--
Uwe Schindler
Achterdiek 19, D-28357 Bremen
https://www.thetaphi.de
eMail:uwe@thetaphi.de

> Thanks for raising the issue. I don’t have a strong opinion on whether or
not to do the deprecation in this release, and since you say that it is
minor, then I don’t see that it necessitates another respin. Since I had
already started an RC2 build, then I just continued with it (and since the
above issue is not yet reviewed ). If others feel like the deprecation
should absolutely be in, then we can do an RC3.

++, makes total sense. Not worth stalling the RC. If RC2 fails to go
forward for some other reason, I'd like to see if I can get this into RC3,
but I wouldn't block RC2 for this minor change. Thanks!

On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 10:43?AM Chris Hegarty
<christopher.hegarty@elastic.co.invalid> wrote:

> For clarity, consider this vote cancelled. A new vote has been started on
> an RC2 build.
>
> On 30 Nov 2023, at 16:22, Greg Miller <gsmiller@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> If we're spinning a new RC, I'd like to ask this group if it would make
> sense to pull this very small method deprecation in:
> https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/12854
>
> If there's a chance we don't release a 9.10 and go directly to 10.0, this
> would be our last opportunity to mark it deprecated on a 9.x version so we
> can actually remove it in 10.0. It's really minor though, so I don't want
> to create churn, but if we can get it into 9.9 without much issue, it would
> be nice. If folks agree, I can get it merged onto 9.9.
>
>
> Thanks for raising the issue. I don’t have a strong opinion on whether or
> not to do the deprecation in this release, and since you say that it is
> minor, then I don’t see that it necessitates another respin.
>
> Since I had already started an RC2 build, then I just continued with it
> (and since the above issue is not yet reviewed ). If others feel like the
> deprecation should absolutely be in, then we can do an RC3.
>
> -Chris.
>
> Cheers,
> -Greg
>
> On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 7:58?AM Michael Sokolov <msokolov@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> for the sake of posterity, I did get a successful smoketest:
>>
>> SUCCESS! [1:00:06.512261]
>>
>> but +0 to release I guess since it's moot...
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 10:38?AM Michael McCandless <
>> lucene@mikemccandless.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 9:56?AM Chris Hegarty
>>> <christopher.hegarty@elastic.co.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>> P.S. I’m less sure about this, but the RC 2 starts a 72hr voting time
>>>> again? (Just so I know what TTL to put on that)
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yeah a new 72 hour clock starts with each new RC :)
>>>
>>> Mike McCandless
>>>
>>> http://blog.mikemccandless.com
>>>
>>
>

My expectation is that we will do a 9.x minor at about the same time as
10.0 anyway, this is what we have done in the past for new majors. This
will give an opportunity to make sure we have deprecation warnings for all
breaking changes in 10.0.

Le jeu. 30 nov. 2023, 10:43, Chris Hegarty
<christopher.hegarty@elastic.co.invalid> a écrit :

> For clarity, consider this vote cancelled. A new vote has been started on
> an RC2 build.
>
> On 30 Nov 2023, at 16:22, Greg Miller <gsmiller@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> If we're spinning a new RC, I'd like to ask this group if it would make
> sense to pull this very small method deprecation in:
> https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/12854
>
> If there's a chance we don't release a 9.10 and go directly to 10.0, this
> would be our last opportunity to mark it deprecated on a 9.x version so we
> can actually remove it in 10.0. It's really minor though, so I don't want
> to create churn, but if we can get it into 9.9 without much issue, it would
> be nice. If folks agree, I can get it merged onto 9.9.
>
>
> Thanks for raising the issue. I don’t have a strong opinion on whether or
> not to do the deprecation in this release, and since you say that it is
> minor, then I don’t see that it necessitates another respin.
>
> Since I had already started an RC2 build, then I just continued with it
> (and since the above issue is not yet reviewed ). If others feel like the
> deprecation should absolutely be in, then we can do an RC3.
>
> -Chris.
>
> Cheers,
> -Greg
>
> On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 7:58?AM Michael Sokolov <msokolov@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> for the sake of posterity, I did get a successful smoketest:
>>
>> SUCCESS! [1:00:06.512261]
>>
>> but +0 to release I guess since it's moot...
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 10:38?AM Michael McCandless <
>> lucene@mikemccandless.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 9:56?AM Chris Hegarty
>>> <christopher.hegarty@elastic.co.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>> P.S. I’m less sure about this, but the RC 2 starts a 72hr voting time
>>>> again? (Just so I know what TTL to put on that)
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yeah a new 72 hour clock starts with each new RC :)
>>>
>>> Mike McCandless
>>>
>>> http://blog.mikemccandless.com
>>>
>>
>

Thanks Adrien, that makes sense. I was wondering how we'd ensure all API
breakages in a major release were covered with deprecation messages. Sounds
like this is the answer.

Cheers,
-Greg

On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 11:14?AM Adrien Grand <jpountz@gmail.com> wrote:

> My expectation is that we will do a 9.x minor at about the same time as
> 10.0 anyway, this is what we have done in the past for new majors. This
> will give an opportunity to make sure we have deprecation warnings for all
> breaking changes in 10.0.
>
> Le jeu. 30 nov. 2023, 10:43, Chris Hegarty
> <christopher.hegarty@elastic.co.invalid> a écrit :
>
>> For clarity, consider this vote cancelled. A new vote has been started on
>> an RC2 build.
>>
>> On 30 Nov 2023, at 16:22, Greg Miller <gsmiller@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> If we're spinning a new RC, I'd like to ask this group if it would make
>> sense to pull this very small method deprecation in:
>> https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/12854
>>
>> If there's a chance we don't release a 9.10 and go directly to 10.0, this
>> would be our last opportunity to mark it deprecated on a 9.x version so we
>> can actually remove it in 10.0. It's really minor though, so I don't want
>> to create churn, but if we can get it into 9.9 without much issue, it would
>> be nice. If folks agree, I can get it merged onto 9.9.
>>
>>
>> Thanks for raising the issue. I don’t have a strong opinion on whether or
>> not to do the deprecation in this release, and since you say that it is
>> minor, then I don’t see that it necessitates another respin.
>>
>> Since I had already started an RC2 build, then I just continued with it
>> (and since the above issue is not yet reviewed ). If others feel like the
>> deprecation should absolutely be in, then we can do an RC3.
>>
>> -Chris.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> -Greg
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 7:58?AM Michael Sokolov <msokolov@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> for the sake of posterity, I did get a successful smoketest:
>>>
>>> SUCCESS! [1:00:06.512261]
>>>
>>> but +0 to release I guess since it's moot...
>>>
>>> On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 10:38?AM Michael McCandless <
>>> lucene@mikemccandless.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 9:56?AM Chris Hegarty
>>>> <christopher.hegarty@elastic.co.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> P.S. I’m less sure about this, but the RC 2 starts a 72hr voting time
>>>>> again? (Just so I know what TTL to put on that)
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yeah a new 72 hour clock starts with each new RC :)
>>>>
>>>> Mike McCandless
>>>>
>>>> http://blog.mikemccandless.com
>>>>
>>>
>>