Francisco, 1) That's what this thread is all about... You know I don't think it's ok. That's why I'm proposing the two images and the operator to move into the `kie-tools` repo, where we can more granularly control the order things are built, thus removing the dependency cycle.
2) Not sure we understand the same thing by "freeze". My proposal is that we select a timestamped SNAPSHOT version from Category A repos to use as base for a release. We give Category B repos some time to adjust, and then cut the release branches. This can happen anytime, and no contributions would ever stop because of it. The development branches can continue accepting PRs normally, even during the release process. Now, if what you're asking is why Category B repos refer to Category A repos via timestamped SNAPSHOTs, the answer is in my first email. See the paragraph starting with "An important note here is that Category B repositories...". On Wed, Mar 13, 2024 at 10:07 AM Francisco Javier Tirado Sarti <ftira...@redhat.com> wrote: > > Tiago > There are a couple of simple and straightforward questions that I > formulated, but since we both write a lot, it might have been lost. Please > let me ask them again. > 1) Do you think it is ok that tools repo is executed after generation of > docker images that are supposed to include those tools or the operator that > is supposed to deploy such images? That's what this thread is all about... You know I'm not ok with it, that's why I'm proposing the two images and the operator to move into the `kie-tools` repo, where we can more granularly control the order things are built and remove the dependency cycle. > 2) Besides that, although not directly related with the current proposal we > are discussing, I really think there are some restrictions taken for > granted that are arbitrary and difficult to sustain on strictly technical > arguments. For example, the need to freeze the rest of the software before > tools are generated. Why? We have dependencies between repos that are not > handled that way: Apps depend on runtimes. Runtimes depend on drools, > Operator depend on runtimes,....and we are not freezing that repos since we > are all releasing at the same time. If we are all releasing at the same > time, what's the rationale behind the freeze? > > > > On Wed, Mar 13, 2024 at 2:56 PM Tiago Bento <tiagobe...@apache.org> wrote: > > > Glad to see the interest this proposal has gotten, and it's good to > > see some alternatives being drafted here, although still lacking clear > > definitions and analysis in regards to disruption, required effort, > > the release process itself, and history. Of course, lots of details > > and clarity on the execution part would be missing too. > > > > As of this moment, based on what I read here, I'm assuming that > > everyone who participated so far doesn't see the initial proposal as > > problematic in terms of feasibility, but some of you have a preference > > not to go with it, because it is "wrong", and apparently because it > > would "jeopardize the evolution of the project". Reading these last > > words made me a little sad, to be honest. But I can deal with it :) > > > > Please let's try and keep the discussion as objective as possible. > > "Right" and "wrong" are too subjective for this kind of conversation. > > > > Now, being practical, unless there are clear arguments based on facts > > and objective concepts that invalidate the initial proposal shared on > > this email, it seems to me that it is currently the only viable > > proposal we have for unblocking and releasing Apache KIE 10. Of > > course, if we end up seeing an alternative proposal with enough > > details and a clear execution plan, I think then we'll be in a very > > good position to choose from multiple options! > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 13, 2024 at 8:36 AM Alex Porcelli <a...@porcelli.me> wrote: > > > > > > Francisco and Gabriele, > > > > > > I understand and acknowledge your desire to find the “right” solution > > > instead to work on a temporary “patch” - however without a detailed > > > proposal I don’t think we can properly evaluate the impact of your > > > suggestion. > > > > > > When I spoke with different SMEs that included tools and CI, the > > > guesstimate for making the necessary changes on CI and codebase to > > > basically have images and operators in the end of the build chain is > > > something like 2 months of effort. Another impact that needs to be > > > discussed is that KIE Tools repo had to be injected in the middle of all > > > pipelines - forcing all PR checks and nightlies to build all repos (PR > > > checks will likely take 12+ hours… I even heard that it could be even 24 > > > hours). > > > > > > Based on the input above, I think it’s quite risk to move in such > > direction > > > without a more detailed plan… because 2 months could be turned easily in > > 6! > > > And this is exactly what happened when we guessed that moving to Apache > > > would take no more than 3 months. But here we are. > > > > > > I really strongly suggest that we focus on a release that could be > > > achievable in less than a month from now, and we - after release - have a > > > in depth discussion about the overall codebase and ci organization. > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 13, 2024 at 8:24 AM Gabriele Cardosi < > > gabriele.card...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Alex, > > > > my suggestion is to move the building of all docker images, from > > whatever > > > > repo (kogito-apps, kie-tools) in a different, downstream repo, to be > > > > invoked after all the others. > > > > I'm not sure if this would solve all the issues, and since I could not > > > > enter in the details of all the involved code, my suggestion may be too > > > > naive. > > > > Having spent almost all of the last year in CI, I may say that, at > > least > > > > for the kie-tools repo, removing the image build step from it should > > not be > > > > too difficult (since it is an issue we already faced and solved). > > > > If, with "detailed proposal", you mean a complete list of all modules > > to be > > > > moved and dependency refactoring, of course I can not provide it right > > now. > > > > > > > > Anyway, I share the concern from Francisco: undoing something is almost > > > > always harder than doing it "rightly" from scratch... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Il giorno mer 13 mar 2024 alle ore 12:43 Francisco Javier Tirado Sarti > > < > > > > ftira...@redhat.com> ha scritto: > > > > > > > > > I do not think estimations should be the only driver to make a > > decision, > > > > > especially when the current proposal is conceptually incompatible > > with > > > > the > > > > > multi repo approach that is taken elsewhere in the project. > > > > > Given my knowledge of the CI it is nearly impossible for me to give > > a > > > > fair > > > > > estimate of how much it might take to achieve step 2) of my previous > > > > e-mail > > > > > . It might take a while or it might be pretty easy after all, I don't > > > > > really know, but I think it will be a good idea if some of the > > experts > > > > on > > > > > CI in the team (the ones that set up the pipeline, which was a huge > > > > > achievement) give an estimate, not me. Estimating how much it takes > > to > > > > > merge two existing repos (without altering CI) is easier, but it > > does not > > > > > mean we are doing the right thing. > > > > > My main concern is that it will be very difficult for me to explain > > to > > > > > someone that arrives new to the team, that having experts on CI on > > the > > > > > team, we decided to merge two repos (once merged, it would be rather > > > > > difficult to unmerge) rather than fix the CI, because of expediency. > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 13, 2024 at 12:30 PM Alex Porcelli <porce...@apache.org> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Francisco, > > > > > > > > > > > > Please take the time to make the more in depth analysis needed and > > > > > provide > > > > > > a more detailed plan… so we - as community- can evaluate the size > > of > > > > the > > > > > > effort. In the conceptual level you shared it’s near impossible to > > > > > estimate > > > > > > the size of the effort and compare with the current proposal. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 13, 2024 at 7:23 AM Francisco Javier Tirado Sarti < > > > > > > ftira...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think I already did a high level proposal. > > > > > > > 1) Remove all dependencies from tooling to images, so images > > depend > > > > on > > > > > > > tooling but tooling does not depend on images. > > > > > > > 2) Then change CI to deal with tooling repo before dealing with > > > > images > > > > > > > repo. > > > > > > > I understand that CI details are tricky and since I'm not > > familiar > > > > with > > > > > > CI > > > > > > > in any way, I barely can make a low level design, but we do not > > need > > > > to > > > > > > fix > > > > > > > everything, just achieve 2), a change of compilation order. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 13, 2024 at 12:17 PM Alex Porcelli <a...@porcelli.me > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Francisco and Grabriele, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You may not like or understand why the current state of the CI > > is > > > > > like > > > > > > > > that… actually has been in Red Hat and has been replicated in > > > > Apache > > > > > as > > > > > > > > used to be…. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But the fact is that this is the current reality. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If you disagree with the current plan, please provide a > > detailed > > > > > > > > alternative so we, as community, can better evaluate the pros > > and > > > > > cons > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > each proposal. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think it’s also fair to say that, post 10 release we need to > > > > have a > > > > > > > much > > > > > > > > in depth discussion about how our codebase is organized, it’s > > clear > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > it’s not working. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 13, 2024 at 6:41 AM Gabriele Cardosi < > > > > > > > > gabriele.card...@gmail.com> > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As Francisco said, > > > > > > > > > I also have the impression that the "images" (if we are > > talking > > > > of > > > > > > > docker > > > > > > > > > images) should be the very last one to be built, in a > > standalone > > > > > > repo. > > > > > > > > > That way, they may "combine" artifacts that are built in > > > > different > > > > > > > repos, > > > > > > > > > regardless of the order in which those are built. > > > > > > > > > Moving them out of all the repos (kogito-apps/kie-tools) > > maybe > > > > > could > > > > > > > > > simplify the situation a bit. > > > > > > > > > (I also think there are some statements of undisputable needs > > > > while > > > > > > > they > > > > > > > > > are, actually, just technical choices. > > > > > > > > > Anyway, this latter point is for longer, following, > > discussion.) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Il giorno mer 13 mar 2024 alle ore 11:23 Francisco Javier > > Tirado > > > > > > Sarti > > > > > > > < > > > > > > > > > ftira...@redhat.com> ha scritto: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Alex, > > > > > > > > > > There are two assumptions that deserve further discussion: > > > > > > > > > > 1) That tool has to be the last to build. why? it does not > > have > > > > > > more > > > > > > > > > sense > > > > > > > > > > to build final images after everything else has been > > built?- > > > > > > > > > > 2) That the impact (in terms of effort now) on fixing CI is > > > > > bigger > > > > > > > than > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > impact (long term consequences) of consolidating two > > unrelated > > > > > > piece > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > software within the same repository. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 13, 2024 at 11:15 AM Alex Porcelli < > > > > a...@porcelli.me > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Francisco, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This was discussed as an alternative solution, however > > it has > > > > > > major > > > > > > > > > > impact > > > > > > > > > > > on CI and there’s also the fact Tool has been always the > > last > > > > > to > > > > > > > > build > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > has no Snapshot published (actually in JavaScript world > > there > > > > > is > > > > > > no > > > > > > > > > > > snapshot concept). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So, based on our evaluation… the proposal here is the > > least > > > > > > > > disruptive > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > will take less time to unblock the release. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > _____________ > > > > > > > > > > > Alex Porcelli > > > > > > > > > > > http://porcelli.me > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 13, 2024 at 6:09 AM Francisco Javier Tirado > > > > Sarti < > > > > > > > > > > > ftira...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > After kie-tools, sorry. I think we are not embracing > > the > > > > fact > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > kogito-images depend on kie-tools, because we want > > those > > > > > images > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > include > > > > > > > > > > > > tools. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 13, 2024 at 11:08 AM Francisco Javier > > Tirado > > > > > Sarti > > > > > > < > > > > > > > > > > > > ftira...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Tiago, > > > > > > > > > > > > > It can be an alternative solution to move > > > > > kn-plugin-workflow > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > kogito-images (so there is not longer dependency from > > > > tools > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > images) > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > then build kogito-images after kogito-tools? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 13, 2024 at 11:01 AM Enrique Gonzalez > > > > Martinez > > > > > < > > > > > > > > > > > > > egonza...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> +1 to unblock release > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> El mié, 13 mar 2024, 10:48, Pere Fernandez (apache) > > < > > > > > > > > > > > > pefer...@apache.org> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> escribió: > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > I say +1 in order to move forward with the 10. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > On Tue, 12 Mar 2024 at 21:45, Alex Porcelli < > > > > > > > a...@porcelli.me > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > I spent the last day or so working closely with > > > > Tiago, > > > > > > > > > exploring > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > different > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > options and getting deeper on the impact and > > > > > evaluating > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > overall > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > release > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > procedure steps required. I agree with the > > proposal > > > > as > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > most > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > viable option for unblocking the 10 release in > > the > > > > > > > > reasonable > > > > > > > > > > time > > > > > > > > > > > > >> frame. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > On Tue, Mar 12, 2024 at 3:45 PM Tiago Bento < > > > > > > > > > > > tiagobe...@apache.org> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > Hi everyone, > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > Unfortunately, I can't do a tl;dr this time, > > as > > > > this > > > > > > > > matter > > > > > > > > > > > > >> requires a > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > lot of context. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > This email will take you < 20 minutes to read, > > > > > > according > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > https://thereadtime.com/. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > As you may have followed on a separate thread > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > ( > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread/nknm6j641qk2c7cl621tsy3fy98tsc69 > > > > > > > > > > > > ), > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > many of us were working towards removing a > > > > circular > > > > > > > > > dependency > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > currently present between `kogito-apps` and > > > > > > `kie-tools`. > > > > > > > > As > > > > > > > > > we > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > progressed towards a solution, we kept > > finding the > > > > > > > > circular > > > > > > > > > > > > >> dependency > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > pop up somewhere else. I'll do a breakdown of > > the > > > > > > things > > > > > > > > we > > > > > > > > > > did, > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > the results we had. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > Right now, even though we started the effort > > to > > > > move > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > Quarkus > > > > > > > > > > > > Dev > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > UI modules to `kie-tools`, we haven't been > > able to > > > > > do > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > yet, > > > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > > > >> we've > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > been busy upgrading KIE Tools to Java 17, > > Maven > > > > > 3.9.6, > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > Quarkus > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > 3.2.9, compatible with Kogito Runtimes > > > > > > > > > 999-20240218-SNAPSHOT. > > > > > > > > > > > This > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > effort was concluded this Monday, with > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-tools/pull/2136 > > > > > > > . > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > The current scenario we have is: > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > 01. > > incubator-kie-kogito-runtimes > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > |==> 02. incubator-kie-kogito-apps > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > C | 03. > > incubator-kie-kogito-examples > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > Y | 04. > > incubator-kie-kogito-images > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > C | 05. > > > > > > > > incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > L | ========================== > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > E | 06. > > > > > > > > > incubator-kie-sandbox-quarkus-accelerator > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > |==> 07. incubator-kie-tools > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > * As `kie-tools`/extended-services > > depends > > > > > on > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > `kogito-apps`/jitexecutor; > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > * and > > > > > > > > `kogito-apps`/{sonataflow,bpmn}-quarkus-devui > > > > > > > > > > > depend > > > > > > > > > > > > >> on > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > `kie-tools`/{many packages} > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > After moving the Quarkus Dev UIs to > > `kie-tools`, > > > > we > > > > > > > > would've > > > > > > > > > > > had: > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > 01. > > incubator-kie-kogito-runtimes > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > 02. incubator-kie-kogito-apps > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > 03. > > incubator-kie-kogito-examples > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > C |==> 04. incubator-kie-kogito-images > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > Y | 05. > > > > > > > > incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > C | ===================== > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > L | 06. > > > > > > > > > incubator-kie-sandbox-quarkus-accelerator > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > E |==> 07. incubator-kie-tools > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > * As `kie-tools`/kn-plugin-workflow > > > > depends > > > > > on > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > `kogito-images`/kogito-swf-devmode; > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > * and > > `kogito-images`/kogito-swf-devmode > > > > > > depends > > > > > > > > on > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > `kie-tools`/sonataflow-quarkus-devui > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > After moving the `kogito-swf-devmode` image to > > > > > > > > `kie-tools`, > > > > > > > > > we > > > > > > > > > > > > >> would've > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > had: > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > 01. > > incubator-kie-kogito-runtimes > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > 02. incubator-kie-kogito-apps > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > 03. > > incubator-kie-kogito-examples > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > 04. > > incubator-kie-kogito-images > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > C |==> 05. > > > > > > > incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > Y | ===================== > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > C | 06. > > > > > > > > > incubator-kie-sandbox-quarkus-accelerator > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > L |==> 07. incubator-kie-tools > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > E > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > * As `kie-tools`/kn-plugin-workflow > > > > depends > > > > > on > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > `kogito-serverless-operator`; > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > * and `kogito-serverless-operator` > > depends > > > > > on > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > `kie-tools`/kogito-swf-devmode > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > Clearly, we have a much bigger problem than a > > > > simple > > > > > > > > > circular > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > dependency. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > After multiple conversations with a lot of > > people, > > > > > > it's > > > > > > > > been > > > > > > > > > > > > really > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > hard coming up with a simple solution that > > makes > > > > it > > > > > > > > possible > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > >> build > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > Apache KIE in one shot, while preserving the > > way > > > > > > > everyone > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > used > > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > contributing to the multiple repositories we > > have. > > > > > > More > > > > > > > > than > > > > > > > > > > > that, > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > while making this assessment, I found more > > > > problems > > > > > > > that, > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > my > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > perspective, block Apache KIE 10. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > In light of that difficulty, I'm coming > > forward > > > > with > > > > > > my > > > > > > > > > > proposal > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > the Apache KIE release process, so we can use > > > > > Apache's > > > > > > > > > > > mechanisms > > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > have a slower-paced, in-depth debate about > > this > > > > > really > > > > > > > > > > > complicated > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > matter. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > I'll lay out my entire perspective about the > > > > current > > > > > > > > > situation > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > >> our > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > codebase, as well as problems I can currently > > see. > > > > > > I'll > > > > > > > > > start > > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > >> an > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > analysis of the repositories and their > > purposes, > > > > > point > > > > > > > out > > > > > > > > > > some > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > problems that I believe are blocking our 10 > > > > release, > > > > > > > > explain > > > > > > > > > > my > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > proposal and discuss some consequences to > > what I'm > > > > > > > > > proposing. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > Let's begin. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > # THE APACHE KIE REPOS > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > A. DROOLS OPTAPLANNER, & KOGITO (count: 11) > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > - incubator-kie-kogito-pipelines @ `main` > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > - incubator-kie-drools @ `main` > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > - incubator-kie-optaplanner @ `main` > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > - incubator-kie-optaplanner-quickstarts @ > > `main` > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > - incubator-kie-kogito-runtimes @ `main` > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > - incubator-kie-kogito-apps @ `main` > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > - incubator-kie-kogito-examples @ `main` > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > - incubator-kie-kogito-images @ `main` > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > - incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator @ > > > > `main` > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > - incubator-kie-kogito-docs @ `main` > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > - incubator-kie-docs @ `main-kogito` > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > B. TOOLS (count: 2) > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > - incubator-kie-sandbox-quarkus-accelerator @ > > > > > `0.0.0` > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > - incubator-kie-tools @ `main` > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > C. BENCHMARKS (count: 2) > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > - incubator-kie-kogito-benchmarks @ `main` > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > - incubator-kie-benchmarks @ `main` > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > D. ARCHIVED (count: 1) > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > - incubator-kie-kogito-operator > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > E. "NON-CODE" (count: 5) > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > - incubator-kie-issues @ `main` > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > (Issues only, README should be updated @ > > > > `main`. > > > > > > > Same > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > GitHub > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > Actions workflows.) > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > - incubator-kie-kogito-website @ `main` > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > (The Kogito website. Develop & deploy at > > the > > > > > > `main` > > > > > > > > > > branch.) > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > - incubator-kie-website @ `main` > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > (The KIE website. Develop @ `main`. Push @ > > > > > > `deploy` > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > update > > > > > > > > > > > > >> the > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > website.) > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > - incubator-kie-kogito-online @ `gh-pages` > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > (GitHub pages used to host > > sandbox.kie.org > > > > and > > > > > > KIE > > > > > > > > > Tools' > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Chrome > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > Extension assets.) > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > - incubator-kie-kogito-online-staging @ `main` > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > (Same as above, but for manual sanity > > checks > > > > > > during > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > staging > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > phase of a release.) > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > TOTAL (count: 21) > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > I grouped the repositories by category, and > > listed > > > > > > them > > > > > > > > in a > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > topological order. Keep in mind that when > > > > flattening > > > > > > > out a > > > > > > > > > > tree, > > > > > > > > > > > > >> there > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > are multiple possibilities. For example, > > > > OptaPlanner > > > > > > > > > could've > > > > > > > > > > > been > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > placed in any position after Drools. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > Category A repos are what I've been referring > > to > > > > as > > > > > > > > `drools` > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > `kogito-*` stream. Of course OptaPlanner is > > inside > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > stream, > > > > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > > > >> the > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > way these repositories reference each other > > are > > > > > > through > > > > > > > > > Maven > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > SNAPSHOTs. More specifically, the 999-SNAPSHOT > > > > > > version. > > > > > > > > This > > > > > > > > > > > > >> mechanism > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > is well-known to the team, and although > > flawed for > > > > > > > > intra-day > > > > > > > > > > > > builds > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > and disruptive for people in many different > > time > > > > > > zones, > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > >> already > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > very comfortable for everyone to work with, I > > > > > assume. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > Contributions made to Category A have some > > > > dedicated > > > > > > > > > > pipelines, > > > > > > > > > > > > >> which > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > are, at least to some extent, able to build > > > > > cross-repo > > > > > > > PRs > > > > > > > > > > > > together > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > and verify that the codebase will continue > > working > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > expected > > > > > > > > > > > > after > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > they're all merged. From what I could gather, > > > > there > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > some > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > "sub-streams" currently configured for > > cross-repo > > > > > PRs. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > - kogito-pipelines > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > - drools, kogito-runtimes, kogito-apps, and > > > > > > > > kogito-examples > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > - optaplanner, and optaplanner-quickstarts > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > - kogito-images, and > > kogito-serverless-operator > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > - kogito-docs > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > - kie-docs > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > This means that sending cross-repo PRs to any > > > > > > > combination > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > repos > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > that are not part of the same "sub-stream" > > cannot > > > > be > > > > > > > > > verified > > > > > > > > > > > > before > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > merging, making our contribution model > > dependent > > > > on > > > > > > > > > individual > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > contributors building stuff on their machines > > to > > > > > > verify > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > > > >> works. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > I based this analysis on > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-pipelines/blob/main/.ci/project-dependencies.yaml > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > , > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-optaplanner/blob/main/.ci/buildchain-project-dependencies.yaml > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > , > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-pipelines/blob/main/.ci/jenkins/config/branch.yaml > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > . > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > Note that I'm not that familiar with these > > > > > pipelines, > > > > > > so > > > > > > > > > > please > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > someone correct me if I'm wrong. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > Category B repos are what I've been referring > > to > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > `kie-tools` > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > stream. The first repo there is a template > > > > > repository > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > used > > > > > > > > > > > > >> by > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > people starting projects from scratch on KIE > > > > > Sandbox, > > > > > > > > > similar > > > > > > > > > > > to a > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > Maven archetype, if you will. The other one > > is the > > > > > KIE > > > > > > > > Tools > > > > > > > > > > > > >> monorepo, > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > a polyglot monorepo with `pnpm` as its build > > > > system. > > > > > > > > > > Currently, > > > > > > > > > > > > KIE > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > Tools hosts Java libraries and apps, > > TypeScript > > > > > > > libraries > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > apps, > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Go > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > apps, Docker images, and Helm charts. The > > > > > `kie-tools` > > > > > > > > > monorepo > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > configured to work with sparse checkouts and > > can > > > > do > > > > > > > > partial > > > > > > > > > > > > builds. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > Category B repos refer to Category A repos > > through > > > > > > > > > timestamped > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > SNAPSHOTs. This is a new mechanism we recently > > > > > > > introduced > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > will > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > build and publish immutable, persistent > > artifacts > > > > > > under > > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > > > > version > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > following the 999-YYYYMMDD-SNAPSHOT format, > > > > > published > > > > > > > > weekly > > > > > > > > > > > every > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > Sunday night. Timestamped SNAPSHOTs are an > > > > evolution > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > Kogito > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > releases, as we're now targeting one release > > for > > > > all > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > Apache > > > > > > > > > > > > KIE, > > > > > > > > > > > > >> so > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > we can't have Kogito releases anymore. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > An important note here is that Category B > > > > > repositories > > > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > > > been > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > historically kept out of any automations we > > used > > > > to > > > > > > > have, > > > > > > > > > way > > > > > > > > > > > back > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > when Kogito started and we had the Business > > > > Central > > > > > > > > (a.k.a. > > > > > > > > > > v7) > > > > > > > > > > > > >> stream > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > still going on. For this reason, Category B > > > > projects > > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > > > > > developed > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > their own automations, based on GitHub > > Actions. > > > > > > > Category B > > > > > > > > > > repos > > > > > > > > > > > > >> have > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > always depended on Category A repos using > > fixed > > > > > > > versions. > > > > > > > > If > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Category > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > B repos have had adopted mutable SNAPSHOTs, > > > > breaking > > > > > > > > changes > > > > > > > > > > on > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > Category A repositories would've had the > > potential > > > > > to > > > > > > > > break > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Category B > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > silently, leaving Category B with a broken > > > > > development > > > > > > > > > stream, > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > introducing unpleasant surprises for > > maintainers > > > > of > > > > > > > > > Category B > > > > > > > > > > > > >> repos, > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > as historically Category A contributors were > > not > > > > > > > familiar > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > Category B repos. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > Contributions made to Category B repos go > > through > > > > a > > > > > > > GitHub > > > > > > > > > > > Actions > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > workflow that builds the relevant part of the > > > > > > > `kie-tools` > > > > > > > > > > > monorepo > > > > > > > > > > > > >> for > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > the changes introduced. Changes made to the > > > > pipeline > > > > > > > > itself > > > > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > > > also > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > picked up as part of PRs, allowing us to do > > things > > > > > > like > > > > > > > > > > > atomically > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > bumping the Node.js version, for example. More > > > > > > > > importantly, > > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > > > >> allows > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > us to upgrade the repository to a new > > timestamped > > > > > > > SNAPSHOT > > > > > > > > > > > > together > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > with the changes necessary to make it stay > > green. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > This setup, however, makes it impossible to > > have > > > > > > > > cross-repo > > > > > > > > > > PRs > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > involving Category A and Category B > > > > simultaneously, > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > current > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > automations we have. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > Category C repos are kind of floating around, > > and > > > > > I'm > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > sure > > > > > > > > > > > if > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > there's much activity going on there. > > Regardless, > > > > as > > > > > > > > they're > > > > > > > > > > > part > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > Apache KIE, they will be part of our release, > > so I > > > > > > > listed > > > > > > > > > them > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > >> us > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > to take them into consideration too. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > Category D is self explanatory. There's only > > one > > > > > repo > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > has > > > > > > > > > > > > >> already > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > been marked for being archived. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > Category E are repos that do not host code > > > > directly, > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > > > either > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > organizational entities, or host websites, > > that > > > > > > > currently > > > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > >> part > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > of any pipelines we have. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > This lack of unification between Category A > > and > > > > > > > Category B > > > > > > > > > is, > > > > > > > > > > > > IMHO, > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > what allowed us to introduce the infamous > > circular > > > > > > > > > dependency > > > > > > > > > > > > >> between > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > `kie-tools` and `kogito-apps`, which we now > > can > > > > > > describe > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > > > > > >> circular > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > dependency between Category A and Category B. > > The > > > > > way > > > > > > I > > > > > > > > see > > > > > > > > > > it, > > > > > > > > > > > if > > > > > > > > > > > > >> we > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > had a single pipeline, building everything > > from > > > > > > `drools` > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > `kie-tools`, such flaws would've never been > > > > > > introduced, > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > we > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > wouldn't be having this huge problem in our > > hands > > > > > > right > > > > > > > > now. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > My proposal for the Apache KIE release process > > > > sees > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > lack > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > unification as a central problem, not only for > > > > this > > > > > > > > release > > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > particular, but for the community as a whole. > > It > > > > is > > > > > my > > > > > > > > > belief > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > >> we > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > are all under the same roof, and that no > > > > > contribution > > > > > > > > should > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > allowed to break any part of our codebase. > > With > > > > the > > > > > > > > > increasing > > > > > > > > > > > > >> volume > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > of code, and hopefully number of contributors > > too, > > > > > we > > > > > > > > cannot > > > > > > > > > > > keep > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > counting on "common sense" to avoid breaking > > > > things. > > > > > > > We're > > > > > > > > > all > > > > > > > > > > > > >> humans > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > after all, and it is our job to have > > mechanisms in > > > > > > place > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > prevent > > > > > > > > > > > > >> us > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > from unwillingly making mistakes. Especially > > when > > > > > > these > > > > > > > > > > mistakes > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > impact on parts of the codebase that we, > > > > > individually, > > > > > > > > > > probably > > > > > > > > > > > > >> can't > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > fix. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > # THE PROBLEMS WE HAVE RIGHT NOW > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > P1. Quarkus Dev UIs @ `kogito-apps` depending > > on > > > > > > > > kiegroup's > > > > > > > > > > KIE > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Tools > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > `0.32.0`. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > See: > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > - > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/search?q=repo%3Akiegroup%2Fkogito-apps+path%3Apackage.json+kie-tools&type=code > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > P2. PR open for Kogito SWF images @ > > > > `kogito-images` > > > > > > > > > depending > > > > > > > > > > on > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > kiegroup's KIE Tools `0.32.0`. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > See: > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > - > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-tools/tree/main/packages/sonataflow-deployment-webapp > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > P3. DashBuilder @ `kie-tools` depending on > > > > > kiegroup's > > > > > > > > > `lienzo` > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > `kie-soup` artifacts at version > > `7.59.0.Final`. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > See: > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > - > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-tools/blob/main/packages/dashbuilder/pom.xml#L64 > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > - > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/search?q=repo%3Aapache%2Fincubator-kie-tools+path%3Apackages%2Fdashbuilder+%24%7Bversion.org.kie%7D&type=code > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > P4. Multiple packages @ `kogito-apps` > > depending on > > > > > > > > > kiegroup's > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > Explainability `1.22.1.Final`. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > * This module was removed from the KIE > > codebase > > > > > here: > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-apps/commit/bbb22c06d37e77b97aae6496d74abe43a8cfc965 > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > and now lives on > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/trustyai-explainability/trustyai-explainability > > > > > > > > , > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > under a different GAV. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > * This new repo depends on Kogito and > > OptaPlanner, > > > > > > > > pointing > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > older > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > versions. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > See: > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > - > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/search?q=repo%3Aapache%2Fincubator-kie-kogito-apps+%3Eexplainability-core%3C&type=code > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > - > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/trustyai-explainability/trustyai-explainability/blob/main/pom.xml#L52-L53 > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > P5. > > `incubator-kie-sandbox-quarkus-accelerator` > > > > > > > depending > > > > > > > > on > > > > > > > > > > > > Kogito > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > `1.32.0.Final` and Quarkus `2.15.3.Final`. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > See: > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > - > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-sandbox-quarkus-accelerator/blob/0.0.0/pom.xml#L32-L38 > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > P6. Category C repos are out of date and not > > part > > > > of > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > Category > > > > > > > > > > > > A > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > CI/Release pipelines. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > * incubator-kie-kogito-benchmarks: (Current > > > > version > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > >> `2.0-SNAPSHOT`, > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > depending on Kogito without a specific > > version, > > > > only > > > > > > by > > > > > > > > > using > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > `http://localhost:8080`) > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > * incubator-kie-benchmarks: (Current version > > is > > > > > > > > > > `1.0-SNAPSHOT`, > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > pointing to Drools 999-SNAPSHOT and > > OptaPlanner > > > > > > > > > > > `8.45.0-SNAPSHOT`) > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > P7. `kie-tools`/packages/kn-plugin-workflow > > has > > > > its > > > > > > E2E > > > > > > > > > > disabled > > > > > > > > > > > > >> after > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > upgrading to 999-20240218-SNAPSHOT. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > In my perspective, P1 and P2 have the same > > > > solution, > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > they > > > > > > > > > > > both > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > suffer from the circular dependency between > > > > > Category A > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > Category > > > > > > > > > > > > >> B. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > As Category A and Category B are both streams > > that > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > been > > > > > > > > > > > > really > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > active, I see this as a blocker, as there are > > > > > > > > contributions > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > cannot be done, given that Category A depends > > on > > > > > > > Category > > > > > > > > B > > > > > > > > > > > with a > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > dephasing of 1 release. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > P3 and P4, although not ideal, can be > > understood > > > > as > > > > > > > > > technical > > > > > > > > > > > > debt. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > Depending on unmaintained projects is > > something > > > > > we'll > > > > > > > > always > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > susceptible to, given time. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > P5 and P6 are easily fixable, as it's just a > > > > matter > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > making > > > > > > > > > > > them > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > part of the play. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > P7 is an isolated problem that won't impact > > the > > > > > > > structure > > > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > > > > > >> anything > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > that we're talking about here, but it is a > > > > > regression > > > > > > we > > > > > > > > > > > > introduced > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > recently. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > Assuming P3 and P4 can be ignored for Apache > > KIE > > > > 10, > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > P5, > > > > > > > > > > > > >> P6, > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > and P7 have easy fixes, the only problems > > left to > > > > > > > discuss > > > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > P1 > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > P2, which can't be done without a proper > > proposal. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > # THE PROPOSAL > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > I'll try to be very meticulous here, since > > from my > > > > > > > > > experience, > > > > > > > > > > > any > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > little miscalculation can lead to our release > > not > > > > > > > working > > > > > > > > > out > > > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > end. To try and avoid that as much as > > possible, > > > > and > > > > > > make > > > > > > > > > > > > everything > > > > > > > > > > > > >> we > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > can to have a successful Apache KIE 10 > > release, > > > > bear > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > me. > > > > > > > > > > > I'll > > > > > > > > > > > > >> lay > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > out a timeline of events that need to happen > > in > > > > > order > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > our > > > > > > > > > > > > >> release > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > to be published, with all artifacts ending up > > in > > > > the > > > > > > > right > > > > > > > > > > > places, > > > > > > > > > > > > >> but > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > first, we need to solve problems P1 and P2. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > As you saw at the beginning of this email, > > all the > > > > > > > > attempts > > > > > > > > > we > > > > > > > > > > > > made > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > left us with the circular dependency showing > > up > > > > at a > > > > > > > > > different > > > > > > > > > > > > >> place, > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > but something all these places have in common > > is > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > they're > > > > > > > > > > > all > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > after kogito-apps, and before to Category B. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > The first part of my proposal is the > > following: > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > S1. We keep the original plan of moving the > > > > Quarkus > > > > > > Dev > > > > > > > > UIs > > > > > > > > > > from > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > `kogito-apps` to `kie-tools`, together with > > > > > Management > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > Task > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > consoles from `kogito-images` to `kie-tools`. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > S2. We move the `kogito-swf-devmode` and > > > > > > > > > `kogito-swf-builder` > > > > > > > > > > > > images > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > from `kogito-images` to `kie-tools` too. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > S3. We move the entire > > > > `kogito-serverless-operator` > > > > > > repo > > > > > > > > > > inside > > > > > > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > > > > > >> new > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > package on `kie-tools`, keeping Git history. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > Solutions S1, S2, and S3 together solve > > problems > > > > P1 > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > P2. > > > > > > > > > Of > > > > > > > > > > > > >> course > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > the rest of > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-issues/issues/967 > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > would still be done too. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > This doesn't come without consequences, of > > course, > > > > > as > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > `kogito-swf-devmode` and `kogito-swf-builder` > > > > > images, > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > `kogito-serverless-operator` would be moving > > from > > > > > > > > Category A > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > Category B. This move would make them have to > > > > > > reference > > > > > > > > > > > Category A > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > repos through timestamped SNAPSHOTs. Since > > > > > > > `kogito-images` > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > `kogito-serverless-operator` are already > > their own > > > > > > > > > > "sub-stream" > > > > > > > > > > > > >> inside > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > Category A, though, contributions made in a > > > > > cross-repo > > > > > > > > > fashion > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > >> this > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > "sub-stream" will continue being possible, now > > > > via a > > > > > > > > single > > > > > > > > > PR > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > `kie-tools`. Cross-repo PRs between Category > > A and > > > > > > > > Category > > > > > > > > > B > > > > > > > > > > > will > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > continue not being possible, and a 1-week > > delay > > > > > > between > > > > > > > > > > merging > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > something on Category A and using it on > > Category B > > > > > > will > > > > > > > > > still > > > > > > > > > > > > >> happen. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > It's worth mentioning that `kie-tools`, > > however, > > > > > does > > > > > > > > allow > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > >> sparse > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > checkouts and partial builds, so working with > > a > > > > > subset > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > >> monorepo > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > is possible and encouraged. Making changes > > only to > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > `packages/kn-plugin-workflow`, for example, > > will > > > > > have > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > PR > > > > > > > > > > > > checks > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > run in < 10 minutes, as you can see here: > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-tools/actions/runs/8237244382/job/22525511722?pr=2136 > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > . > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > We're not compromising when running partial > > builds > > > > > > too. > > > > > > > We > > > > > > > > > > know > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > the entire repo will continue working even > > after > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > building a > > > > > > > > > > > > >> small > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > subset of the changes. Doing partial or full > > > > builds > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > automatically > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > determined by the changes of a PR. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > Keep in mind that, even though I'm proposing > > we > > > > > move a > > > > > > > > bunch > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > additional stuff into `kie-tools`, I see this > > as a > > > > > > > > TEMPORARY > > > > > > > > > > > > >> solution > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > for our codebase. `kie-tools` would host some > > > > > > additional > > > > > > > > > stuff > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > TEMPORARILY so that we can release and > > continue > > > > > moving > > > > > > > > > > forward. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > As I mentioned on other places, `kie-tools` > > > > became a > > > > > > > > > polyglot > > > > > > > > > > > > >> monorepo > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > out of necessity, and although I'm really > > proud of > > > > > > what > > > > > > > we > > > > > > > > > > > > achieved > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > there so far, I don't think `kie-tools` has a > > > > setup > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > suitable > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > for all the different nuances that compose our > > > > > > > community. > > > > > > > > > I'm > > > > > > > > > > > well > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > aware that a polyglot monorepo that does not > > > > follow > > > > > > > > > widespread > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > conventions will scare some people away, and > > as > > > > much > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > we've > > > > > > > > > > > > tried > > > > > > > > > > > > >> to > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > make build instructions clear, we can't > > always get > > > > > > past > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > >> prejudice > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > some people have towards the "front-end" > > > > ecosystem. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > With all that said, I keep thinking this is > > the > > > > best > > > > > > > > course > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > >> action > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > for us right now. We keep most of our stuff > > > > > unchanged, > > > > > > > we > > > > > > > > > > > unblock > > > > > > > > > > > > >> the > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > release, and we have a working setup that will > > > > suit > > > > > us > > > > > > > > well > > > > > > > > > > > while > > > > > > > > > > > > we > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > discuss and reach a conclusion regarding the > > > > future > > > > > of > > > > > > > our > > > > > > > > > > > > codebase > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > structure. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > Let me paint a quick picture here of what our > > code > > > > > > base > > > > > > > > > would > > > > > > > > > > > look > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > like, repository-wise, if my proposal is > > accepted: > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > CATEGORY REPO > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > ===================== > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > A incubator-kie-kogito-pipelines > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > A incubator-kie-drools > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > A incubator-kie-optaplanner > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > A > > incubator-kie-optaplanner-quickstarts > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > A incubator-kie-kogito-runtimes > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > A incubator-kie-kogito-apps > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > A incubator-kie-kogito-examples > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > A incubator-kie-kogito-images > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > A incubator-kie-kogito-docs > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > A incubator-kie-kogito-benchmarks > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > A incubator-kie-docs > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > A incubator-kie-benchmarks > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > ===================== > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > B > > > > > incubator-kie-sandbox-quarkus-accelerator > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > B incubator-kie-tools > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > ===================== > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > D incubator-kie-kogito-operator > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > ===================== > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > E incubator-kie-issues > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > E incubator-kie-kogito-website > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > E incubator-kie-website > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > E incubator-kie-kogito-online > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > E > > incubator-kie-kogito-online-staging > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > ===================== > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > * Category C becomes part of Category A, and > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > `kogito-serverless-operator` moves entirely > > inside > > > > > > > > > > `kie-tools`. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > * With `kogito-swf-{builder,devmode}` images > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > `kogito-serverless-operator` inside > > `kie-tools`, > > > > > there > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > no > > > > > > > > > > > > cycles > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > anymore, as inside `kie-tools`, we can > > granularly > > > > > > build: > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > 1. packages/sonataflow-deployment-webapp > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > 2. packages/sonataflow-quarkus-devui > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > 3. packages/sonataflow-images (containing > > > > > > > > > > > `kogito-swf-builder` > > > > > > > > > > > > >> and > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > `kogito-swf-devmode`) > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > 4. packages/sonataflow-operator (contents > > from > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > `kogito-serverless-operator`) > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > 5. packages/kn-plugin-sonataflow > > > > > > > > > > > > (`packages/kn-plugin-workflow`, > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > but renamed) > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > The second part of the proposal is the release > > > > > process > > > > > > > > > itself, > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > assuming the structure above is what we have. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > Here it is: > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > 1. Define a timestamped SNAPSHOT to be used as > > > > > cutting > > > > > > > > point > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > Category A repos. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > 2. Update Category B repos to point to this > > > > > > timestamped > > > > > > > > > > > SNAPSHOT, > > > > > > > > > > > > >> and > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > verify that everything is working. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > 3. At this point, with everything working, we > > can > > > > > > branch > > > > > > > > out > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > `10.0.x`. Category A from the timestamped > > SNAPSHOT > > > > > > tag, > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Category B > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > from `main`. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > 4. All Category A and Category B repos update > > > > their > > > > > > > > versions > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > 10.0.0, in their `10.0.x` branches. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > 5. Update Category B repos to point to > > Category A > > > > > > repos > > > > > > > > > using > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > 10.0.0 version. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > 6. At this point, we can vote on the release > > based > > > > > on > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > `10.0.x` > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > branches, given we don't expect any code > > changes > > > > > > > anymore. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > 7. After voting passes, we're good to start > > the > > > > > > release > > > > > > > > > > process. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > 8. Category A repos follow their > > manual/automated > > > > > > > release > > > > > > > > > > > process, > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > pointing to the `10.0.x` branch. Tags pushed > > to > > > > Git, > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > built > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > artifacts pushed to their registries. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > 9. We wait a little bit for Category A > > artifacts > > > > to > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > propagated > > > > > > > > > > > > on > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > registries. ~1 day. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > 10. Category B repos follow their > > manual/automated > > > > > > > release > > > > > > > > > > > > process, > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > pointing to the `10.0.x` branch. Tags pushed > > to > > > > Git, > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > built > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > artifacts pushed to their registries. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > 11. Category D repos are ignored. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > 12. Category E repos can be manually tagged > > with > > > > > > 10.0.0 > > > > > > > > from > > > > > > > > > > > their > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > default branches. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > More needs to be discussed if we're planning > > to > > > > > > maintain > > > > > > > > > > > multiple > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > release streams in parallel, but I guess it > > can > > > > wait > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > after > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Apache > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > KIE 10. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > Thank you for reading, and I'm looking > > forward to > > > > > > > hearing > > > > > > > > > back > > > > > > > > > > > > from > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > everyone. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > Of course, alternative solutions are possible. > > > > This > > > > > > > email, > > > > > > > > > > > > however, > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > summarizes my view of how we should attack the > > > > > > problem, > > > > > > > > > > > > considering > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > disruption, required effort, the release > > process > > > > > > itself, > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > >> history. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > Feel free to propose alternatives. This is > > not a > > > > > > voting > > > > > > > > > > thread. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > Tiago Bento > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > > > > > > dev-unsubscr...@kie.apache.org > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: > > > > > > > dev-h...@kie.apache.org > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@kie.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@kie.apache.org > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@kie.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@kie.apache.org
