Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[MRELEASE-1109] patch JDomModel #201

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 10, 2024

Conversation

mkolesnikov
Copy link
Contributor

Following this checklist to help us incorporate your
contribution quickly and easily:

  • Make sure there is a JIRA issue filed
    for the change (usually before you start working on it). Trivial changes like typos do not
    require a JIRA issue. Your pull request should address just this issue, without
    pulling in other changes.
  • Each commit in the pull request should have a meaningful subject line and body.
  • Format the pull request title like [MRELEASE-XXX] - Fixes bug in ApproximateQuantiles,
    where you replace MRELEASE-XXX with the appropriate JIRA issue. Best practice
    is to use the JIRA issue title in the pull request title and in the first line of the
    commit message.
  • Write a pull request description that is detailed enough to understand what the pull request does, how, and why.
  • Run mvn clean verify -Prun-its to make sure basic checks pass. A more thorough check will
    be performed on your pull request automatically.

If your pull request is about ~20 lines of code you don't need to sign an
Individual Contributor License Agreement if you are unsure
please ask on the developers list.

To make clear that you license your contribution under
the Apache License Version 2.0, January 2004
you have to acknowledge this by using the following check-box.

@elharo elharo changed the title MRELEASE-1109 patch JDomModel [MRELEASE-1109] patch JDomModel Dec 20, 2023
@@ -96,7 +96,7 @@ public abstract class AbstractRewritePomsPhase extends AbstractReleasePhase impl
* Regular expression pattern matching Maven expressions (i.e. references to Maven properties).
* The first group selects the property name the expression refers to.
*/
private static final Pattern EXPRESSION_PATTERN = Pattern.compile("\\$\\{(.+)\\}");
private static final Pattern EXPRESSION_PATTERN = Pattern.compile("\\$\\{(.+?)\\}");
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is .+? the same as .*

Copy link
Member

@kwin kwin Jan 1, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

No it isn’t: https://docs.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/essential/regex/quant.html. The latter is greedy while the former is reluctant.

@elharo elharo merged commit 8dfcb47 into apache:master Jan 10, 2024
7 checks passed
@@ -96,7 +96,7 @@ public abstract class AbstractRewritePomsPhase extends AbstractReleasePhase impl
* Regular expression pattern matching Maven expressions (i.e. references to Maven properties).
* The first group selects the property name the expression refers to.
*/
private static final Pattern EXPRESSION_PATTERN = Pattern.compile("\\$\\{(.+)\\}");
private static final Pattern EXPRESSION_PATTERN = Pattern.compile("\\$\\{(.+?)\\}");
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Causes MRELEASE-1151. This caused the weekly Jenkins core release to fail on July 2, 2024. We have downgraded Maven Release Plugin to 3.0.1 in order to restore stability to our releases.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

As a workaround you could try to add configuration property <arguments>-Dchangelist=</arguments> for the maven-release-plugin

Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Causes MRELEASE-1151.

As explained in #202 (review), #202 seems to resolves this issue (with one exception), and I think this PR should not have been released without also including #202. I would recommend that the next release either include #202 or revert this PR.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants