I think it's really important that we set expectations with existing Akka users. It's totally reasonable to not have a seamless migration from Akka, but we should make sure Akka users understand the specific migration challenges. Akka has a wide range of libraries and use cases, so the migration can vary a lot depending on what you're doing. Pekko 1.0 should at least include some documentation addressing these issues.
On Sun, Oct 30, 2022 at 5:40 PM Tim Moore <[email protected]> wrote: > I’ll clarify my comment from the GitHub discussion that Matthew > referenced. I did not mean that a 1.0 release without rolling upgrade > support wouldn’t be practically useful. I agree with Jean-Luc, Alex and > others that it’s a good idea to have an initial rename-only release to > allow downstream dependencies and other curious users to get started with > it. > > In fact, I think that even if Pekko 1.0 did support rolling upgrades from > Akka 2.6, critical production deployments would not adopt it immediately. > > Even if there is a significant set of users who won’t adopt 1.0, there's > another significant set of users who might. You have to start somewhere. > > -- > Tim Moore > > > > On 31 Oct 2022, at 1:50 am, Jean-Luc Deprez <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > Interesting, the mail from Alex landed in spam. > > > > Having a rolling migration seems like setting the bar too high for a 1.0. > > > > Getting a pure renamed 1.0 out, shows capability and opens up both a new > > target and window for community PRs, which I feel are in limbo ATM. > > Those could include rolling release proposals. > > > > The sooner the better too, as it should be way ahead of the security fix > > commitment of lightbend expiring, otherwise most of the community will > have > > left elsewhere. > > > > > > On Sun, Oct 30, 2022, 14:12 Matthew Benedict de Detrich > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> There are issues with this approach as pointed out in > >> https://github.com/mdedetrich/akka-apache-project/discussions/25 and > >> https://github.com/mdedetrich/akka-apache-project/discussions/28. In > >> summary such a release may not actually even be practical useful for a > >> significant set of current Akka users because they cannot perform > rolling > >> upgrades from Akka to Pekko unless additional changes are done. > >> > >> On Fri, Oct 28, 2022 at 6:15 PM Alexandru Nedelcu <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> > >>> On Fri, Oct 28, 2022, at 19:04, PJ Fanning wrote: > >>>> We are also quite a long way away from making any big changes. I think > >>>> the majority of the Pekko community are interested in releasing an > >>>> open source equivalent of Akka with as few changes as possible. > >>> > >>> +1 > >>> > >>> The first release should have just the necessary package name changed — > >>> this unfreezes downstream projects that may want to switch to the fork, > >> or > >>> to support it as an alternative to Akka. > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Alexandru Nedelcu > >>> alexn.org > >>> > >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > >>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >>> > >>> > >> > >> -- > >> > >> Matthew de Detrich > >> > >> *Aiven Deutschland GmbH* > >> > >> Immanuelkirchstraße 26, 10405 Berlin > >> > >> Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, HRB 209739 B > >> > >> Geschäftsführer: Oskari Saarenmaa & Hannu Valtonen > >> > >> *m:* +491603708037 > >> > >> *w:* aiven.io *e:* [email protected] > >> > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >
