lucenenet-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Itamar Syn-Hershko <ita...@code972.com>
Subject Re: 3.0.3 Pre-Release Nuget Packages
Date Thu, 23 Aug 2012 18:34:05 GMT
Why do we have a single nuget package for all contribs in the first place?

On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 9:25 PM, Christopher Currens <
currens.chris@gmail.com> wrote:

> Yeah, the single nuget contrib package will cause problems, because
> both Contrib.Spatial and Contrib.Spatial.NTS use the same namespace...
>
> If we appended NTS to the namespace, then it would break the tests,
> because we run the same test code for both, and would then need to
> update all the using namespace definitions.  It seems the best
> solution would be to have a separate nuget packaged for it.
>
> How should I go about this?  Should I try and separate it out (I might
> as well do more or all of them, then)?  In theory, it should be pretty
> easy, except for all of the new descriptions that would have  to be
> written for each nuspec :/
>
> On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 11:08 AM, Prescott Nasser <geobmx540@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
> > We have a single nuget contrib package atm.
> >
> > For the naming convention thing Chris - might as well get that in. I
> have a
> > few hours window in about 4 hours to redo the nuget stuff.
> >
> > Dev users - this was supposed to be a quick back and forth but grew a
> bit,
> > it should have been on the dev list. My apologies.
> >
> >
> >
> > Sent from my Windows Phone
> > ________________________________
> > From: Itamar Syn-Hershko
> > Sent: 8/23/2012 10:42 AM
> > To: Christopher Currens
> > Cc: Prescott Nasser
> >
> > Subject: Re: 3.0.3 Pre-Release Nuget Packages
> >
> > If there is a package for each contrib, let's have NTS as another
> package.
> > For that package, add NetTopologySuite 1.12 and GeoAPI as nuget
> dependencies
> > (I think the GeoAPI one will be derived from NTS anyway)
> >
> > I think we should also release with LUCENENET-503 in
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 8:35 PM, Christopher Currens
> > <currens.chris@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Should I add the NTS spatial to the Spatial nuget package or create a
> > separate Spatial.NTS nuget package?
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 10:13 AM, Christopher Currens
> > <currens.chris@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Yeah.  I'll get all that done and send out another email when its
> >> finished.  Should I get LUCENENET-503 in there as well, or only put
> >> that in trunk?  It's just a naming consistency thing.
> >>
> >> On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 10:12 AM, Itamar Syn-Hershko <
> itamar@code972.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>> Cool, thanks
> >>>
> >>> Can you also handle updating the assemblies in both trunk and branch?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 8:07 PM, Christopher Currens
> >>> <currens.chris@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> It took me an embarrassingly long time to figure out how to properly
> >>>> push to github (I have no idea why, I've done it in the past!), but
I
> >>>> made a pull request with configuration changes to allow it to build
in
> >>>> .NET 3.5 and 4.0.
> >>>>
> >>>> Now, I'm going to push changes to the SVN that changes all of the
> >>>> assembly metadata from 2.9.x to 3.0.3
> >>>>
> >>>> On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 9:37 AM, Christopher Currens
> >>>> <currens.chris@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> > If you want to target multiple frameworks, each framework version
> has
> >>>> > to live in each configuration property group.  You have
> >>>> > TargetFrameworkVersion v3.5 set in the *35 configurations, but
> there's
> >>>> > a global v4.0 that's overriding it.
> >>>> >
> >>>> > I actually have changes that fix this, I just have to figure out
how
> >>>> > to use git properly. :)
> >>>> >
> >>>> > On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 9:06 AM, Itamar Syn-Hershko
> >>>> > <itamar@code972.com>
> >>>> > wrote:
> >>>> >> Pushed my latest changes to github. Some 3.5 compilation setting
> must
> >>>> >> be off
> >>>> >> - can you have a look?
> >>>> >>
> >>>> >> Maybe we should update all contrib metadata to say 3.0.3?
> >>>> >>
> >>>> >>
> >>>> >> On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 6:58 PM, Christopher Currens
> >>>> >> <currens.chris@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> >>>
> >>>> >>> The binaries in lib/spatial4n/NET35 are actually targeting
the 4.0
> >>>> >>> runtime, so Visual Studio and MSBuild refuses to compile
them,
> >>>> >>> saying
> >>>> >>> it can't find those types.  I pushed .NET 35 binaries to
the 3.0.3
> >>>> >>> branch, and I just noticed that you updated the binaries
in Trunk
> >>>> >>> about a half hour ago.  Right now Trunk fails for me and
3.0.3
> >>>> >>> succeeds.  I'm assuming those include changes to the binaries
in
> >>>> >>> trunk
> >>>> >>> aren't present in the Spatial4n repo on github, so I wasn't
going
> to
> >>>> >>> try and rebuild them for the 3.0.3 branch.
> >>>> >>>
> >>>> >>> There's another issue I found while messing around with
this (I
> >>>> >>> actually was starting work on LUCENENET-503 when I ran
into this),
> >>>> >>> we
> >>>> >>> have a lot of contrib assemblies with old assembly metadata.
 Some
> >>>> >>> contrib assemblies are marked 2.9.2, some 2.9.4, and a
few others.
> >>>> >>> I'll be pushing those changes to the 3.0.3 branch, which
should be
> >>>> >>> fine considering they're just metadata changes.
> >>>> >>>
> >>>> >>>
> >>>> >>> On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 8:51 AM, Itamar Syn-Hershko
> >>>> >>> <itamar@code972.com>
> >>>> >>> wrote:
> >>>> >>> > I just committed a few changes that should resolve
some of those
> >>>> >>> > issues.
> >>>> >>> >
> >>>> >>> > .NET 4.0 compilation goes smooth, but I can't get
3.5 to
> properly
> >>>> >>> > compile
> >>>> >>> > and test, not sure why. Will appreciate it if you
can have a
> look.
> >>>> >>> >
> >>>> >>> > Chris just pushed some changes to the branch, not
sure if they
> are
> >>>> >>> > related?
> >>>> >>> > CC'ed him
> >>>> >>> >
> >>>> >>> > No problem re the lib folder. If the contribs are
split up and
> >>>> >>> > each
> >>>> >>> > will
> >>>> >>> > have its own nuget package we can have 2 for spatial
- one
> regular
> >>>> >>> > and
> >>>> >>> > the
> >>>> >>> > other NTS, while the latter will depend on GeoAPI
and
> >>>> >>> > NetTopologySuite
> >>>> >>> > to
> >>>> >>> > automate this a bit.
> >>>> >>> >
> >>>> >>> > I can also put Spatial4n on nuget, but I think it's
a bit too
> >>>> >>> > early
> >>>> >>> > for
> >>>> >>> > that
> >>>> >>> >
> >>>> >>> > Any way, I'm good with releasing it now
> >>>> >>> >
> >>>> >>> > On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 6:43 PM, Prescott Nasser
> >>>> >>> > <geobmx540@hotmail.com>
> >>>> >>> > wrote:
> >>>> >>> >>
> >>>> >>> >> Sorry, wasn't quite clear. Two things.
> >>>> >>> >>
> >>>> >>> >> First the project didn't reference the lib/spatial4n
stuff so I
> >>>> >>> >> included
> >>>> >>> >> those references - but I wanted to confirm with
you that that
> was
> >>>> >>> >> right. -
> >>>> >>> >> you've confirmed that is right.
> >>>> >>> >>
> >>>> >>> >> The second issue is that the lib folder is we
cannot
> distribute,
> >>>> >>> >> nor
> >>>> >>> >> can
> >>>> >>> >> we distribute any files that we don't have source
code for in
> our
> >>>> >>> >> svn.
> >>>> >>> >> So as
> >>>> >>> >> it stands, I could compile the spatial project,
but I when I
> put
> >>>> >>> >> the
> >>>> >>> >> nuget
> >>>> >>> >> package up, I will have to add spatial4n as a
dependency.
> >>>> >>> >>
> >>>> >>> >> This isn't a problem, I just wanted to make sure
it was clear
> and
> >>>> >>> >> that's
> >>>> >>> >> your intention
> >>>> >>> >>
> >>>> >>> >>
> >>>> >>> >> Sent from my Windows Phone
> >>>> >>> >> ________________________________
> >>>> >>> >> From: Itamar Syn-Hershko
> >>>> >>> >> Sent: 8/23/2012 2:20 AM
> >>>> >>> >> To: Prescott Nasser
> >>>> >>> >>
> >>>> >>> >> Subject: Re: 3.0.3 Pre-Release Nuget Packages
> >>>> >>> >>
> >>>> >>> >> I'm not sure I'm following, all the spatial4n
stuff is already
> >>>> >>> >> committed
> >>>> >>> >> to lib/spatial4n. What was the problem and what
did you fix?
> >>>> >>> >>
> >>>> >>> >> The DLLs there are used twice - Spatial4n.Core
from
> >>>> >>> >> Contrib.Spatial,
> >>>> >>> >> and
> >>>> >>> >> Spatial4n.Core.NTS + GeoAPI + NetTopologySuite
+
> PowerCollection
> >>>> >>> >> from
> >>>> >>> >> Contrib.Spatial.NTS (the one with polygon support
enabled). I
> >>>> >>> >> hope
> >>>> >>> >> that
> >>>> >>> >> makes sense now.
> >>>> >>> >>
> >>>> >>> >> On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 10:21 AM, Prescott Nasser
> >>>> >>> >> <geobmx540@hotmail.com>
> >>>> >>> >> wrote:
> >>>> >>> >>
> >>>> >>> >> Hey Itamar - I'm trying to compile the contrib
packages - I ran
> >>>> >>> >> into an
> >>>> >>> >> error. I solved it by making sure to include all
the
> >>>> >>> >> lib/Spatial4n
> >>>> >>> >> packages
> >>>> >>> >> - does that sound right to you? I'll have a few
hours tomorrow
> to
> >>>> >>> >> hopefully
> >>>> >>> >> get 3.0.3 Contrib RC2 put on nuget.
> >>>> >>> >>
> >>>> >>> >> Also, any reason we didn't include all of these
.dll's in the
> >>>> >>> >> contrib
> >>>> >>> >> folder? Are you keeping those under a difference
license and
> >>>> >>> >> don't
> >>>> >>> >> want
> >>>> >>> >> to
> >>>> >>> >> integrate them with the Lucene.Net.Contrib.Spatial
project
> >>>> >>> >> specifically?
> >>>> >>> >>
> >>>> >>> >> ~P
> >>>> >>> >>
> >>>> >>> >>
> >>>> >>> >>
> >>>> >>> >> ________________________________
> >>>> >>> >> Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2012 04:41:36 +0300
> >>>> >>> >>
> >>>> >>> >> Subject: Re: 3.0.3 Pre-Release Nuget Packages
> >>>> >>> >> From: itamar@code972.com
> >>>> >>> >> To: geobmx540@hotmail.com
> >>>> >>> >>
> >>>> >>> >> Yeah I think it is. Let's cut another RC and see
how it goes.
> >>>> >>> >>
> >>>> >>> >> Enjoy your vacation!
> >>>> >>> >>
> >>>> >>> >> On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 4:25 AM, Prescott Nasser
> >>>> >>> >> <geobmx540@hotmail.com>
> >>>> >>> >> wrote:
> >>>> >>> >>
> >>>> >>> >> Good to go? I'll can merge trunk into 3.0.3 if
you can't easily
> >>>> >>> >> and
> >>>> >>> >> then
> >>>> >>> >> I'll reroll the packages
> >>>> >>> >>
> >>>> >>> >> ________________________________
> >>>> >>> >> Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2012 21:17:30 +0300
> >>>> >>> >>
> >>>> >>> >> Subject: Re: 3.0.3 Pre-Release Nuget Packages
> >>>> >>> >> From: itamar@code972.com
> >>>> >>> >> To: geobmx540@hotmail.com
> >>>> >>> >>
> >>>> >>> >>
> >>>> >>> >> yes I was
> >>>> >>> >>
> >>>> >>> >> On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 8:31 PM, Prescott Nasser
> >>>> >>> >> <geobmx540@hotmail.com>
> >>>> >>> >> wrote:
> >>>> >>> >>
> >>>> >>> >> Sounds good - did you get a bounce from
> dev@lucenenet.apache.org?
> >>>> >>> >> I
> >>>> >>> >> think
> >>>> >>> >> they accidentally closed the jira to set those
up without
> getting
> >>>> >>> >> them
> >>>> >>> >> setup
> >>>> >>> >>
> >>>> >>> >> ________________________________
> >>>> >>> >> Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2012 20:16:53 +0300
> >>>> >>> >> Subject: Fwd: 3.0.3 Pre-Release Nuget Packages
> >>>> >>> >> From: itamar@code972.com
> >>>> >>> >> To: geobmx540@hotmail.com
> >>>> >>> >>
> >>>> >>> >>
> >>>> >>> >>
> >>>> >>> >>
> >>>> >>> >> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> >>>> >>> >> From: Itamar Syn-Hershko <itamar@code972.com>
> >>>> >>> >> Date: Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 8:13 PM
> >>>> >>> >> Subject: Re: 3.0.3 Pre-Release Nuget Packages
> >>>> >>> >> To: dev@lucenenet.apache.org
> >>>> >>> >>
> >>>> >>> >>
> >>>> >>> >> Give me a couple of more hours, I want to recheck
everything is
> >>>> >>> >> in
> >>>> >>> >> place,
> >>>> >>> >> and then you'll have my green light
> >>>> >>> >>
> >>>> >>> >>
> >>>> >>> >> On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 4:20 PM, Prescott Nasser
> >>>> >>> >> <geobmx540@hotmail.com>
> >>>> >>> >> wrote:
> >>>> >>> >>
> >>>> >>> >> Itamar - looks like you e committed it all, are
you satisfied?
> I
> >>>> >>> >> will
> >>>> >>> >> merge changes into 3.0.3 and cut new nuget packages.
> >>>> >>> >>
> >>>> >>> >> Ill be gone for two weeks with limited email,
so unless someone
> >>>> >>> >> else
> >>>> >>> >> wants
> >>>> >>> >> to cut RC's for the binary and source releases
and hold a vote,
> >>>> >>> >> ill
> >>>> >>> >> do
> >>>> >>> >> that
> >>>> >>> >> right when I get back
> >>>> >>> >>
> >>>> >>> >>
> >>>> >>> >> Sent from my Windows Phone
> >>>> >>> >> ________________________________
> >>>> >>> >> From: Prescott Nasser
> >>>> >>> >> Sent: 8/18/2012 2:02 PM
> >>>> >>> >> To: Lucene Developers
> >>>> >>> >> Subject: RE: 3.0.3 Pre-Release Nuget Packages
> >>>> >>> >>
> >>>> >>> >> Alright, that's reasonable. Shoot us an email
when you've got
> it
> >>>> >>> >> complete,
> >>>> >>> >> I will cut another lucene.net.contrib pre-release
package for
> >>>> >>> >> nuget,
> >>>> >>> >> and
> >>>> >>> >> give the community until next weekend to vet it.
 Meanwhile -
> >>>> >>> >> Does
> >>>> >>> >> anyone
> >>>> >>> >> know how to run RAT against the 3.0.3 branch?
I'd like to get a
> >>>> >>> >> report
> >>>> >>> >> on
> >>>> >>> >> that so we can fix any issues there ~P
> >>>> >>> >>
> >>>> >>> >>  > Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2012 22:56:58 +0300
> >>>> >>> >> > Subject: Re: 3.0.3 Pre-Release Nuget Packages
> >>>> >>> >> > From: itamar@code972.com
> >>>> >>> >> > To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org
> >>>> >>> >> >
> >>>> >>> >> > Actively working on it as we speak, should
be ready by
> Tuesday.
> >>>> >>> >> > Up to
> >>>> >>> >> > you :)
> >>>> >>> >> >
> >>>> >>> >> > On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 10:43 PM, Prescott
Nasser
> >>>> >>> >> > <geobmx540@hotmail.com>wrote:
> >>>> >>> >> >
> >>>> >>> >> > >
> >>>> >>> >> > >
> >>>> >>> >> > >
> >>>> >>> >> > > Itamar - can you provide a status update
on what work
> you've
> >>>> >>> >> > > done
> >>>> >>> >> > > on
> >>>> >>> >> > > the
> >>>> >>> >> > > Geometry stuff? If it's something that
you're close on,
> could
> >>>> >>> >> > > we
> >>>> >>> >> > > commit it
> >>>> >>> >> > > to the trunk and 3.0.3 branch so that
the community could
> try
> >>>> >>> >> > > their
> >>>> >>> >> > > hand at
> >>>> >>> >> > > finishing it? If not, I think we should
move without it. I
> >>>> >>> >> > > don't
> >>>> >>> >> > > want
> >>>> >>> >> > > to
> >>>> >>> >> > > hold off 3.0.3 that much longer
> >>>> >>> >> > >
> >>>> >>> >> > > > Subject: Re: 3.0.3 Pre-Release
Nuget Packages
> >>>> >>> >> > > > From: zgramana@gmail.com
> >>>> >>> >> > > > Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 17:18:17
-0400
> >>>> >>> >> > > > To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org
> >>>> >>> >> > > >
> >>>> >>> >> > > > Glad to hear it.
> >>>> >>> >> > > >
> >>>> >>> >> > > > FWIW, I've deployed the Spatial
contrib on client
> projects
> >>>> >>> >> > > > against
> >>>> >>> >> > > 2.9.4.1, which would break without the
Geometry namespace.
> >>>> >>> >> > > I'm
> >>>> >>> >> > > doubt
> >>>> >>> >> > > I'm
> >>>> >>> >> > > the only one.
> >>>> >>> >> > > >
> >>>> >>> >> > > > I would encourage not releasing
the 3.0.3
> Contribs.Spatial
> >>>> >>> >> > > > until
> >>>> >>> >> > > > that is
> >>>> >>> >> > > included. I think most people using
the stable NuGet feed
> >>>> >>> >> > > would
> >>>> >>> >> > > expect
> >>>> >>> >> > > 3.0.3 to be complete with respect to
Java Lucene. It may
> take
> >>>> >>> >> > > people
> >>>> >>> >> > > quite
> >>>> >>> >> > > a bit of work to get their code working
again in 3.0.3 with
> >>>> >>> >> > > just
> >>>> >>> >> > > the
> >>>> >>> >> > > .NETification changes alone. If people
find that, after all
> >>>> >>> >> > > that
> >>>> >>> >> > > work,
> >>>> >>> >> > > they
> >>>> >>> >> > > now have to wait for a maintenance release,
there could be
> >>>> >>> >> > > some
> >>>> >>> >> > > real
> >>>> >>> >> > > grumpy
> >>>> >>> >> > > coders out there taking to social media
with pitch forks in
> >>>> >>> >> > > hand.
> >>>> >>> >> > > >
> >>>> >>> >> > > > It sounded like he was done with
4.0 and just back
> porting
> >>>> >>> >> > > > to
> >>>> >>> >> > > > 3.5. I
> >>>> >>> >> > > would be happy to lend Itamar a hand,
if he feels it could
> >>>> >>> >> > > help.
> >>>> >>> >> > > >
> >>>> >>> >> > > >
> >>>> >>> >> > > > On Aug 15, 2012, at 4:29 PM, Christopher
Currens <
> >>>> >>> >> > > currens.chris@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> >>> >> > > >
> >>>> >>> >> > > > > Itamar said a few weeks ago
he was planning on
> >>>> >>> >> > > > > getting polygon support into
the spatial module (I am
> >>>> >>> >> > > > > assuming
> >>>> >>> >> > > > > that
> >>>> >>> >> > > > > this is the Geometry namespace).
 I'm unsure if it will
> >>>> >>> >> > > > > make it
> >>>> >>> >> > > > > into
> >>>> >>> >> > > > > the official 3.0.3 release
or it if it will be pushed
> >>>> >>> >> > > > > back
> >>>> >>> >> > > > > into
> >>>> >>> >> > > > > a
> >>>> >>> >> > > > > maintenance release shortly
after.
> >>>> >>> >> > > >
> >>>> >>> >> > >
> >>>> >>> >> > >
> >>>> >>> >> > >
> >>>> >>> >>
> >>>> >>> >>
> >>>> >>> >>
> >>>> >>> >>
> >>>> >>> >>
> >>>> >>> >>
> >>>> >>> >
> >>>> >>>
> >>>> >>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >
> >
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message