Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Preliminary notes for 0.4.9 release

0 views
Skip to first unread message

Patrick R. Michaud

unread,
Feb 22, 2007, 12:21:48 AM2/22/07
to perl6-i...@perl.org
Hello, all-

I've been working on the 0.4.9 release; so far things seem to be
going reasonably well. Many thanks to Jerry Gay and others who
have come before me for cleaning up the release process and making
sure the various NEWS/STATUS docs are up to date! It's really quite
straightforward now.

I do have a couple of questions, however, especially for the
people who have been working on release management in the past.
I want to make sure I understand them a bit more before cutting
the release. (Also, for some reason I've been extremely fatigued
all day today and thus making small mistakes... so I think I prefer
to take one night's rest and get it right in the morning, than to
force it out this evening and perhaps have to clean up a lot of
small mistakes.)

1. The t/library/pg.t tests require libpq.so to be installed
in order to run -- should I be testing ('make fulltest') with
this library installed?

More generally, is there a specific set of platforms I should
be performing 'make fulltest' on prior to release? And do I
need to be maximizing test coverage by making sure certain
libraries or capabilities are available on my test platform(s)?
The libpg.o is one example... but what about things such as
ICU, readline, and the like?

Again, it's no problem for me to install the libraries -- I'm
just curious about the correct procedure so I can document it
for later release managers.)


2. In r17137, I'm getting one test failure from 'make fulltest':

Failed Test Stat Wstat Total Fail List of Failed
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
t/pmc/pmethod_test.t 1 256 2 1 2

Anyone know anything more about this failure, and should it just
be marked 'TODO' or shall I see about fixing it?


3. The release instructions don't make any mention of verifying
MANIFEST or running 'make manitest' -- should this be a required
step in creating a release? Or is it happening somewhere that
I'm not seeing?


4. Anyone have a good name for the release? I'm satisfied with
leaving 0.4.9 unnamed unless there's a sense that we really
need to name it (in which case I'll come up with one or
accept suggestions from others :-).


Any answers will be greatly appreciated -- I'll update
RELEASE_INSTRUCTIONS with whatever we come up with, and then
publish 0.4.9!

Thanks!

Pm

Chromatic

unread,
Feb 22, 2007, 12:40:22 AM2/22/07
to perl6-i...@perl.org, Patrick R. Michaud
On Wednesday 21 February 2007 21:21, Patrick R. Michaud wrote:

> 1. The t/library/pg.t tests require libpq.so to be installed
> in order to run -- should I be testing ('make fulltest') with
> this library installed?

They should skip without the library installed; if that doesn't work on your
platform, there's a problem with the test.

I did notice that with libpq.so, they had a problem with init_pmc, but I fixed
that and they should all work now. It would be good for someone with
PostgreSQL installed and running to run them.

> More generally, is there a specific set of platforms I should
> be performing 'make fulltest' on prior to release? And do I
> need to be maximizing test coverage by making sure certain
> libraries or capabilities are available on my test platform(s)?
> The libpg.o is one example... but what about things such as
> ICU, readline, and the like?
>
> Again, it's no problem for me to install the libraries -- I'm
> just curious about the correct procedure so I can document it
> for later release managers.)
>
>
> 2. In r17137, I'm getting one test failure from 'make fulltest':
>
> Failed Test Stat Wstat Total Fail List of Failed
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

>---- t/pmc/pmethod_test.t 1 256 2 1 2


>
> Anyone know anything more about this failure, and should it just
> be marked 'TODO' or shall I see about fixing it?

Works for me on x86 Linux.

> 4. Anyone have a good name for the release? I'm satisfied with
> leaving 0.4.9 unnamed unless there's a sense that we really
> need to name it (in which case I'll come up with one or
> accept suggestions from others :-).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_parrots

I claim Yellow Rosella for my turn.

-- c

Allison Randal

unread,
Feb 22, 2007, 5:26:28 AM2/22/07
to Patrick R. Michaud, perl6-i...@perl.org
Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
> I think I prefer
> to take one night's rest and get it right in the morning, than to
> force it out this evening and perhaps have to clean up a lot of
> small mistakes.)

Sensible.

> 1. The t/library/pg.t tests require libpq.so to be installed
> in order to run -- should I be testing ('make fulltest') with
> this library installed?
>
> More generally, is there a specific set of platforms I should
> be performing 'make fulltest' on prior to release? And do I
> need to be maximizing test coverage by making sure certain
> libraries or capabilities are available on my test platform(s)?
> The libpg.o is one example... but what about things such as
> ICU, readline, and the like?

Ideally 'make fulltest' would be run both with and without libpq.so (so
you know the skip is working, and know the tests are passing with the
library). But it's not really practical for one person to manually
reconfigure their box a dozen times to hit all the possible
configuration alternatives. But a handful of people each testing a
particular platform with a small set of configuration alternatives is
practical. This is part of the "platform porters" role.

For now, I'd install libpq.so, as it's more important to know the tests
are passing than that the skip is working.

> Again, it's no problem for me to install the libraries -- I'm
> just curious about the correct procedure so I can document it
> for later release managers.)
>
>
> 2. In r17137, I'm getting one test failure from 'make fulltest':
>
> Failed Test Stat Wstat Total Fail List of Failed
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> t/pmc/pmethod_test.t 1 256 2 1 2
>
> Anyone know anything more about this failure, and should it just
> be marked 'TODO' or shall I see about fixing it?

I already had the file open on my laptop. It's the new stuff for
implementing the Parrot calling conventions in C. It's still under
development, and not core to using Parrot, so put in an RT ticket noting
the failure. It passes on PPC OSX as well. Does it only fail for you in
'make -s all world fulltest' or does it also fail when you run a default
ordinary 'make' and 'make test'? If the former, don't bother marking it
as TODO. If the latter, mark it as TODO referencing the ticket number.

> 3. The release instructions don't make any mention of verifying
> MANIFEST or running 'make manitest' -- should this be a required
> step in creating a release? Or is it happening somewhere that
> I'm not seeing?

It happens in Configure.PL.

> 4. Anyone have a good name for the release? I'm satisfied with
> leaving 0.4.9 unnamed unless there's a sense that we really
> need to name it (in which case I'll come up with one or
> accept suggestions from others :-).

It's a tradition! From the wikipedia list I suggest 'Socorro'.

Allison

Nuno Carvalho

unread,
Feb 22, 2007, 6:37:17 AM2/22/07
to perl6-i...@perl.org
Greetings,

On 2/22/07, chromatic <chro...@wgz.org> wrote:
> On Wednesday 21 February 2007 21:21, Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
>
> > 1. The t/library/pg.t tests require libpq.so to be installed
> > in order to run -- should I be testing ('make fulltest') with
> > this library installed?
>
> They should skip without the library installed; if that doesn't work on your
> platform, there's a problem with the test.
>
> I did notice that with libpq.so, they had a problem with init_pmc, but I fixed
> that and they should all work now. It would be good for someone with
> PostgreSQL installed and running to run them.

Looks good to me:

* PostgreSQL installed&running:

$ prove t/library/pg.t

t/library/pg....ok

1/43 unexpectedly succeeded

All tests successful (1 subtest UNEXPECTEDLY SUCCEEDED).

Files=1, Tests=43, 1 wallclock secs ( 0.09 cusr + 0.02 csys = 0.11 CPU)


* No postgreSQL installed:

$ prove t/library/pg.t

t/library/pg....ok

43/43 skipped: skipped

All tests successful, 43 subtests skipped.

Files=1, Tests=43, 0 wallclock secs ( 0.06 cusr + 0.02 csys = 0.08 CPU)


> > 2. In r17137, I'm getting one test failure from 'make fulltest':
> >
> > Failed Test Stat Wstat Total Fail List of Failed
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >---- t/pmc/pmethod_test.t 1 256 2 1 2
> >
> > Anyone know anything more about this failure, and should it just
> > be marked 'TODO' or shall I see about fixing it?
>
> Works for me on x86 Linux.

* On x86 linux:

$ prove t/pmc/pmethod_test.t

t/pmc/pmethod_test....ok

All tests successful.

Files=1, Tests=2, 0 wallclock secs ( 0.08 cusr + 0.03 csys = 0.11 CPU)


> > 4. Anyone have a good name for the release? I'm satisfied with
> > leaving 0.4.9 unnamed unless there's a sense that we really
> > need to name it (in which case I'll come up with one or
> > accept suggestions from others :-).
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_parrots
>
> I claim Yellow Rosella for my turn.

My vote goes for 'Carolina Parakeet'.

./smash

0 new messages