Hi Thomas, I agree that some of these should be moved to the attic, but I wasn't comfortable yet with taking on ripping out and replacing all these components yet as I am still trying to understand the total code base of Turbine and all its parts.
FYI - I did a build/install of fulcrum-factory 1.1.1, and then fulcrum-pool 1.0.5 - all the pool tests worked after that without any issue for me. After this round, I will just stick to publishing them one at a time as I think it is a little risky doing it this way if there are dependencies that fail to be voted up. After we get turbine 5.0 out the door, maybe we can look more closely at what we can move to commons and place fulcrum components in the attic. The work I did on generics for pool are not in the 1.0.5 release (I realized it after publishing for vote), so they are just in SVN now for 1.0.6-SNAPSHOT - but if we are able to get rid of pool all together, maybe we don't even need to bother with it. Thanks! Jeff On 1/13/19 2:25 PM, Thomas Vandahl wrote: > Hi Jeff, > > On 11.01.19 16:05, Jeffery Painter wrote: >> There are a number of fulcrum components coming down the pipeline to get >> us to a release of Turbine 5. > Thanks for taking it on. I know it is not the most attractive thing to do. > >> Just a quick poll to see whether you prefer we keep releasing one by one >> in order (as we have started), or if it is OK for me to start >> pipe-lining them like I did for factory and pool? > The components have dependencies on each other (fulcrum-pool 1.0.5 -> > fulcrum-factory 1.1.1) How did you make the fulcrum-pool tests pass > without having fulcrum-factory 1.1.1 publicly available? I strongly > suggest to publish them one at at time. > > By the way, we have several components (like Intake) which chose to use > commons-pool over fulcrum-pool long ago. To me, these two (pool and > factory) are candidates for the attic. Commons-pool, for example, is > much more powerful. > >> fulcrum-parser should be up next and includes a lot of changes that >> Thomas made to support parts... while I was reviewing that code, I did >> notice some comments that it would have been nice to update pool to >> support generics which I just pushed an update for someone to review. >> >> I am still not entirely confident that the changes I made to >> fulcrum-pool for generification are complete or correct, but I am trying >> :-) > Are these changes part of the 1.0.5 release? They are not mentioned in > the vote mail. > >> Also - if a release is voted down, are there guidelines on how to do a >> proper rollback/cancel? I think I did it once when I first messed up >> yaafi-crypto but I kind of stumbled my way through that and not sure I >> followed best practices. > The Nexus repository can be dropped, the SVN tag deleted. No harm is > done. Just be sure to refer to the failed vote Message-ID in the commit > messages. > > Bye, Thomas >
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
