Thanks for the response everyone. According to your feedback it seems there is consensus for option 1.
There is already a jenkins job that publishes a linux-build of the standalone client at https://nightlies.apache.org/solr/desktop-ui/, so we are able to do that quite easy. With GitHub actions it should be possible to use OS-specific runners for MacOS and Windows as well. I will have to investigate the distribution options that also comply with ASF requirements and see how we can consume them in builds and publications safely, and optionally release the standalone clients with ease. I will try to create a PR for review with the necessary changes this week. Stay tuned. Thanks again for your quick and replies and insightful opinions. On 2026/07/01 06:54:03 Christos Malliaridis wrote: > Hello everyone, > > Based on the feedback, the Admin UI's build times have become a problem and > many people are using workarounds to bypass the module's slow build times. > > To address this issue I am considering a couple paths we could follow (more > proposals are of course welcomed): > > 1. Keep the Admin UI in the same repo but split it from the current build > and only include its artifacts. This would introduce new build workflows > dedicated to the UI module. This may also be a bit tricky, as I am not sure > how to ship artifacts of the Admin UI in Solr builds. It would probably > require us to pin down a commit and use that to fetch artifacts from > somewhere like GitHub(?). > > 2. Split the Admin UI into a separate repository with its own release > cycles. We already have a couple of other solr repositories, and the Admin > UI could be just another one. Integrating it into the existing project as a > dependency is possible, and it would also lean towards the direction of a > headless Solr with optional UI (which some of us are not favoring). That > doesn't mean it has to of course. What's for sure here is that we would > have to go through ASF to request another repo, and everything that comes > with it. > > 3. Disable the wasmJs target build that causes the slowdowns. This would be > the easiest and quickest resolution for now, but would not address the core > issue in the long run, as we want the wasmJs build to replace the current > UI at some point, so we would have to introduce it again or enable it > occasionally. > > 4. Use gradle and kotlin caching features. I believe this is also an > option, but I have some experience with gradle caching that it is often > better left turned off. > > I'd like to address the build slowdowns soon, as it has been a burden to > some of you for too long. Your input and thoughts would help us decide > quicker. > > Best, > Christos > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
