Hi, Please ignore this thread now. Upgrading to 1.7.9 is not safe. Oak 1.7.9 is not stable or close to 1.8 and the Oak team has indicated there will be more changes before 1.8 potentially to exported packages. In fact, so many that a discussion thread for Oak 2.0 thread was just started on oak-dev. Best Regards Ian
On 13 October 2017 at 14:26, Ian Boston <i...@tfd.co.uk> wrote: > Hi, > > On 13 October 2017 at 13:25, Oliver Lietz <apa...@oliverlietz.de> wrote: > >> On Friday 13 October 2017 13:00:53 Ian Boston wrote: >> > On 13 October 2017 at 11:16, Robert Munteanu <romb...@apache.org> >> wrote: >> > > Hi Ian, >> >> Hi, >> >> > > On Fri, 2017-10-13 at 10:51 +0100, Ian Boston wrote: >> > > > Hi, >> > > > I would like to upgrade Sling to depend on Oak 1.7.9 as it was just >> > > > released. The patch be the same as [1] with 1.7.8 replaced by 1.7.9. >> > > > >> > > > Any objections ? >> > > >> > > No objections here. >> > > >> > > Related to the pull request - is it required for bundles consuming >> > > testing.paxexam to bump up their dependency version? >> > >> > If those bundles want to perform integration tests on Oak 1.7.9 then >> they >> > need to bump the dependency. >> > Some do, some dont, so I bumped all to make certain all would still >> build >> > on Oak 1.7.9. >> > >> > The first one that needs to do a release, will have to release paxexam >> at >> > the same time... and fix the references to the 0.0.5-SNAPSHOT version. >> > >> > I assume that was done before since all were on 0.0.4. >> >> no need for a new release of Testing PaxExam (but will do a release soon >> anyway), you can override the version for Oak with the one from POM (was >> done >> in the past e.g. for Oak Server): >> > > > Between Oak 1.6.5 and Oak 1.7.9 there has been a modularisation effort. > Whereas selecting a version of Oak prior to 1.7.9 was a simple task of > changing a single oak-core version number (actually 2 since Jackrabbit API > is versioned with Oak releases), between 1.7.9 and later there are 6 > additional bundles. It is true I could have done that in oak-server, > however that wouldn't be appropriate for other bundles, some of which > broke. > > Not building with ITs having Oak 1.7.9 or later for every bundle risks > releasing a Sling bundle that wont work with that version of the Oak > server. So far I have not seen a breakage of that nature, but that is no > longer an unknown risk. > > I hope that makes sense and is clear from the patch itself. > > Best Regards > Ian > > >> >> https://github.com/apache/sling/tree/trunk/testing/org.apach >> e.sling.testing.paxexam >> >> Regards, >> O. >> >> > Best Regards >> > Ian >> > >> > > I think they can >> > > run their tests just fine on the old dependencies and in case of a >> > > release of that module we don't need to wait for a release of >> > > testing.paxexam. >> > > >> > > I'm looking at >> > > >> > > - bundles/commons/contentdetection >> > > - bundles/commons/metrics >> > > - bundles/extensions/org.apache.sling.resource.presence >> > > - bundles/scripting/core >> > > - contrib/extensions/rewriter >> > > - contrib/extensions/sling >> > > - contrib/scripting/freemarker >> > > - contrib/scripting/org.apache.sling.scripting.thymeleaf >> > > >> > > Thanks, >> > > >> > > Robert >> >> >> >
