No branch hell please (just same as in core) ;-)
If something is done, it should go into the main branch.

Naturally, dependsbot should only target main to avoid noise.

> Am 11.09.2026 um 03:45 schrieb Kristian Rickert <[email protected]>:
> 
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-28389
> 
> I sent out the INFRA ticket for addons. I'll set up the CICD once it is
> approved and create a PR for it. Nothing will be merged to main without a
> PR.
> 
> Does anyone have thoughts on whether these addons should move to the
> sandbox or become separate branches? I think they should all go to the
> sandbox if no one claims them, since they haven't been touched in a long
> time, but creating separate branches for each is also fine with me.
> 
> Some questions to discuss:
> 
>  - Repository & Branch Strategy: Sandbox vs. separate branches for
> unclaimed add-ons
>  - Stale Work & Retirement Rules: Guidelines for marking work as stale or
> retiring defunct code
>  - Graduation to Core: Rules and thresholds (e.g., high
> adoption/downloads) for moving an add-on into core
>  - Tasks & Ownership: Assigning tasks and build/release management (I'll
> be glad to take on builds)
>  - Version Matrix & API Compatibility: Maintaining a 3.x core
> compatibility matrix and defining API compatibility promises (my vote: keep
> up with latest, new versions of opennlp and we cut a branch and focus on
> the latest.  Dependabot updates on supported branches that we retire with
> Opennlp core)
>  - CICD & Workflow Setup: Aligning CI/CD, test setups, build triggers, and
> manual/automated workflow dispatch with core
>  - GitHub Issues & Governance: When to enable GitHub Issues, establishing
> PR review thresholds (e.g., required approvals), and PR template
> requirements
>  - Security Model: Defining how add-ons align with the existing OpenNLP
> security policy, particularly for native code, data downloads, or
> third-party dependencies (most of this is defined but we'll formalize it in
> the repo)
> 
> Kristian
> 
> 
>> On Wed, Sep 9, 2026 at 4:48 PM Kristian Rickert <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>> I meant for local development. But just poking at the maven plug in, I
>> don't think that'll be needed either :)
>> 
>> For cicd I'll put something up tonight. Assuming the expected failure,
>> I'll full out the infra ticket
>> 
>>> On Wed, Sep 9, 2026, 3:32 PM Richard Zowalla <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> 
>>> No need for scripts. GH action can due that (via action view you can
>>> select the branch to run from… cf.
>>> https://github.com/apache/stormcrawler-site/blob/main/.github/workflows/publish-staging.yml
>>> You just trigger it for a branch from the action view in GitHub.
>>> 
>>> If you go with scripts, you don’t need credentials or INFRA issues. It
>>> works with your normal ASF ldap credentials...
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> Am 09.09.2026 um 21:25 schrieb Kristian Rickert <[email protected]>:
>>>> 
>>>> rzo1:
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks for the feedback.
>>>> 
>>>> Keeping it fully manual. We can create a dev script to trigger it from
>>> the
>>>> CLI to avoid click-ops. Nexus also supports grace periods and snapshot
>>>> retention days, which we may have access to, but I will keep everything
>>>> manual for now.
>>>> 
>>>> Pretty sure you're right about the password requirement, so I will test
>>> it
>>>> first before submitting an INFRA ticket to avoid crowding their queue.
>>>> 
>>>> I will create a JIRA issue for this. Acceptance testing should be
>>>> straightforward.. it just needs to create the JAR in the branch.
>>>> 
>>>> Load-bearing,
>>>> Kristian Rickert
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Wed, Sep 9, 2026 at 3:15 PM Richard Zowalla <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> I wouldn’t deploy each commit on a branch. Perhaps a manual workflow
>>>>> (similar to website staging in for example StormCrawler) would do the
>>> job?
>>>>> You can even select from which branch to run, etc. - that seems to be
>>> the
>>>>> easiest way and avoids bloating ASF infrastructure with throw away
>>>>> snapshots.
>>>>> 
>>>>> For the credentials to be set into the repo: it requires an infra
>>> ticket
>>>>> afair.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Rungs
>>>>> Richard
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Am 09.09.2026 um 21:12 schrieb Kristian Rickert <[email protected]>:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Hi Jeff,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Yep, that naming convention is exactly right, and these will only go
>>> to
>>>>>> SNAPSHOTS on repository.apache.org.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I'll test this using the Maven Release Plugin, which I believe handles
>>>>> this
>>>>>> convention out of the box. Since it is on an add-ons branch, it will
>>> just
>>>>>> error out if it fails, but our existing Nexus account should cover
>>> it. If
>>>>>> needed, I will submit an INFRA ticket to complete the setup.  We can
>>>>> always
>>>>>> change it too :)
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>> Kristian
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 9, 2026 at 8:53 AM Jeff Zemerick <[email protected]>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I don't think I have any objections. Would you make the version
>>>>>>> something like `<version>2.0.0-FEATURE-XYZ-SNAPSHOT</version>` when
>>> on
>>>>>>> the branches to indicate it's from a non-main branch?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I know the snapshot repository is already in the core pom.xml. I
>>> think
>>>>>>> the CI would need updated to deploy those snapshots from a non-main
>>>>>>> branch? I think we can put a condition on that CI workflow to only do
>>>>>>> that if the branch (or pom.xml version) is named in a certain way to
>>>>>>> prevent all branches from being deployed.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> Jeff
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Tue, Sep 8, 2026 at 9:17 PM Kristian Rickert <[email protected]
>>>> 
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Hi team,
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Can we use Nexus for internal development
>>>>>>>> <https://infra.apache.org/repository-faq.html>? Specifically, does
>>>>>>> anyone
>>>>>>>> object to using it for builds that are not yet merged into main?
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> I would like to establish a build train between core, add-ons, and
>>>>>>> sandbox
>>>>>>>> (where core and add-ons deploy, but sandbox does not). Currently,
>>> there
>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>> no easy way to deploy dependencies until they are released to main.
>>>>> While
>>>>>>>> Maven handles this well, it requires deployment capabilities.
>>> Writing
>>>>>>>> custom scripts to bypass this defeats the purpose of our existing
>>>>> tools.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Here is what I am proposing:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 1.  Create a branch between core and add-ons.
>>>>>>>> 2.  Allow both to be published as snapshots to local Apache.
>>>>>>>> 3.  Ensure these JARs are available in GitHub CI/CD to keep core and
>>>>>>>> add-ons in sync during development.
>>>>>>>> 4.  Make the JARs accessible in sandbox CI/CD so all authenticated
>>>>>>>> committers can sync builds without manually downloading core or
>>>>> add-ons.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> This workflow will allow us to test dependent services, such as
>>>>> deploying
>>>>>>>> the gRPC server internally, without reverting to a pre-Maven style
>>> of
>>>>>>>> development.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> I am happy to set this up, though I would appreciate pairing with
>>>>> someone
>>>>>>>> via Slack to navigate any system limits and serve as a second set of
>>>>>>> eyes.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Please let me know your thoughts on this.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Load-bearing email rung,
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Kristian Rickert
>>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 

Reply via email to