So 10.0.x for Drools and 3.0.x for Kogito/Kie? We have only the
2.44.0.Alpha release for Kogito, thou. But 3.0.0 should send the right
message.
Also, we need to rename a few artifacts from kogito- to kie- and
kogito-serverless-workflow to sonataflow. Can we do it as a follow-up task
after this initial migration, and before release?

Cheers!
--
Ricardo Zanini Fernandes
Vida longa e próspera.


On Mon, Oct 16, 2023 at 1:08 PM Jason Porter <[email protected]>
wrote:

> +1 for version 10.
>
> For LTS reasons and ease of use, do we want to go with version 10
> everywhere and release everything with the same version? I know there's a
> BOM, and maybe that makes this moot. Thoughts?
>
> On 2023/10/16 14:35:12 Alex Porcelli wrote:
> > Thank you for the clarification of the implications to recycle 9.x,
> Mario!
> >
> > Given that situation, my personal preference, for better communication
> > sake, is to have a hard reset to 10.0 focused only on Jakarta 10.
> >
> > Maybe it's worth a new thread for sake of clarity? I can start it.
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 16, 2023 at 10:11 AM Mario Fusco <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > Alex,
> > >
> > > The problem is not the use of LATEST (which is indeed deprecated and
> hopefully nobody uses it anymore), but the fact that releasing a
> 9.0.0.Final when the 9.44.0.Final will break maven implicit version numbers
> ordering and semantic versioning.
> > >
> > > Moreover this will be even more problematic and confusing for users,
> especially new ones. How do you choose the version of a dependency that you
> have to add for the first time into your project? Personally what I do is
> going to the Maven Central Repository Search website, doing a search for
> the dependency I need and bringing in the very latest version (unless there
> are very good reasons, like a known bug, not to do so). Now if I'd do this
> exercise with drools I'd always bring in 9.44 even if there are new
> versions available (but with a lower version number).
> > >
> > > If you really want a fresh start (and I could agree that it could be a
> good idea at this point) then we should skip the 9 at all ( like Windows
> did so it could not be THAT bad :) ) and release a 10.0.0.Final.
> > >
> > > Mario
> > >
> > > On 2023/10/16 13:29:11 Alex Porcelli wrote:
> > > > Mario,
> > > >
> > > > Thank you for the 9.44 reference, I though we had somehow an Alpha
> release
> > > > and not a final one.
> > > >
> > > > With all pros and cons of the current situation (including the
> already
> > > > published 9.44) - I’d still prefer a hard reset around 9.0 focused on
> > > > Jakarta 10 only.
> > > >
> > > > In my opinion the hard reset on 9.0 with Jakarta 10
> > > > outperforms the impact of the already existing 9.44 release. (It’s my
> > > > understanding that the impact is for users that would use -LATEST -
> which
> > > > is already considered a deprecated format anyway)
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Oct 16, 2023 at 9:11 AM Mario Fusco <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > > To me, it feels messy that we have a 8.45.0 release, followed by
> a 9.45
> > > > > > release in our first Apache release, and immediately after put
> 8.x (1.x
> > > > > for
> > > > > > Kogito) in maintenance.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I think we could step back and re-evaluate our strategy.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Why not reset and focus only on Jakarta10 (and
> Quarkus/SpringBoot. 3.x)
> > > > > and
> > > > > > cut it as 9.0? (yes, I’m aware that we had in recent past a
> 9.44.Alpha).
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi Alex,
> > > > >
> > > > > What you suggested makes sense and as I wrote I'm equally afraid
> that
> > > > > users may be confused around our versions numbering. Unfortunately
> I'm also
> > > > > afraid that you missed that we already put out a 9.44.0.Final
> version (
> > > > > https://central.sonatype.com/artifact/org.drools/drools-engine )
> that is
> > > > > the result of that automatic migration of version 8.44 to Quarkus
> 3 and
> > > > > Jakarta using that Openrewrite script. That's the reason why I
> think that
> > > > > there aren't many alternatives other than continuing from there.
> Can you
> > > > > think to any better solution?
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > Mario
> > > > >
> > > > >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> > >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> >
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>
>

Reply via email to