----- Original Message ----- > From: "Roy Golan" <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Wednesday, September 3, 2014 9:07:47 AM > Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils > > On 08/29/2014 02:52 AM, Yair Zaslavsky wrote: > > Thanks everyone for your thoughts. > > I would like to sum things up (as I understood from this thread) - > > a. We will defer the move to commons collections4. > > b. We should introduce some class renaming, not have LinqXXX > > I think those renaming and general refactoring of compat should be a > series of bugzilla's we should communicate as > entry-level,low-hanging-fruits,you-name-it > for new comers to ovirt. > > > c. Later on we can shift to an "already maintained" package. > > I wonder how close we are to moving to java8 where all these > dependencies (commonsX, LinqWhatever) could go to the waste bin. > > probably a mix of jboss/rhel/gwt.
During one of my lastest patches, I disovered there is also Linq in GWT code. sweet. > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > >> From: "Vojtech Szocs" <[email protected]> > >> To: "Greg Sheremeta" <[email protected]> > >> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <[email protected]>, [email protected] > >> Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2014 4:49:57 PM > >> Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils > >> > >> > >> > >> ----- Original Message ----- > >>> From: "Greg Sheremeta" <[email protected]> > >>> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <[email protected]> > >>> Cc: [email protected] > >>> Sent: Monday, August 25, 2014 1:52:44 PM > >>> Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> ----- Original Message ----- > >>>> From: "Yair Zaslavsky" <[email protected]> > >>>> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <[email protected]> > >>>> Cc: "Greg Sheremeta" <[email protected]>, "Itamar Heim" > >>>> <[email protected]>, [email protected] > >>>> Sent: Sunday, August 24, 2014 9:51:31 PM > >>>> Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> ----- Original Message ----- > >>>>> From: "Alon Bar-Lev" <[email protected]> > >>>>> To: "Greg Sheremeta" <[email protected]> > >>>>> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <[email protected]>, "Itamar Heim" > >>>>> <[email protected]>, [email protected] > >>>>> Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 11:36:31 PM > >>>>> Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> ----- Original Message ----- > >>>>>> From: "Greg Sheremeta" <[email protected]> > >>>>>> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <[email protected]> > >>>>>> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <[email protected]>, "Itamar Heim" > >>>>>> <[email protected]>, [email protected] > >>>>>> Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 11:33:09 PM > >>>>>> Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- > >>>>>>> From: "Alon Bar-Lev" <[email protected]> > >>>>>>> To: "Greg Sheremeta" <[email protected]> > >>>>>>> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <[email protected]>, "Itamar Heim" > >>>>>>> <[email protected]>, [email protected] > >>>>>>> Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 4:20:19 PM > >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- > >>>>>>>> From: "Greg Sheremeta" <[email protected]> > >>>>>>>> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <[email protected]> > >>>>>>>> Cc: "Itamar Heim" <[email protected]>, [email protected], "Alon > >>>>>>>> Bar-Lev" > >>>>>>>> <[email protected]> > >>>>>>>> Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 8:39:54 PM > >>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- > >>>>>>>>> From: "Yair Zaslavsky" <[email protected]> > >>>>>>>>> To: "Itamar Heim" <[email protected]> > >>>>>>>>> Cc: [email protected] > >>>>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 8:39:31 PM > >>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- > >>>>>>>>>> From: "Itamar Heim" <[email protected]> > >>>>>>>>>> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <[email protected]>, "Yevgeny > >>>>>>>>>> Zaspitsky" > >>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> > >>>>>>>>>> Cc: [email protected] > >>>>>>>>>> Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 12:25:52 AM > >>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> On 08/21/2014 09:55 AM, Yair Zaslavsky wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- > >>>>>>>>>>>> From: "Yevgeny Zaspitsky" <[email protected]> > >>>>>>>>>>>> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <[email protected]> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Cc: "Moti Asayag" <[email protected]>, "Allon Mureinik" > >>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]>, [email protected] > >>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 4:35:33 PM > >>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about > >>>>>>>>>>>> LinqUtils > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> On 21/08/14 12:08, Yair Zaslavsky wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> From: "Yevgeny Zaspitsky" <[email protected]> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> To: "Moti Asayag" <[email protected]> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <[email protected]>, "Allon > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mureinik" > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]>, [email protected] > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 11:26:40 AM > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> LinqUtils > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> It seems like we can try moving to common-collections4. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yum > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> on > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> my > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Fedora20 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> computer finds apache-commons-collections4 package. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Fortunately > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> somebody > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> packed the jar into for a rpm for us. :-) > >>>>>>>>>>>>> What about RHEL 6.5? Can you please run a quick check? > >>>>>>>>>>>> Unfortunately my happiness was too hasty. Only Fedora > >>>>>>>>>>>> people > >>>>>>>>>>>> care > >>>>>>>>>>>> to > >>>>>>>>>>>> be > >>>>>>>>>>>> in the forward of the technology... The RHEL ones do not > >>>>>>>>>>>> care > >>>>>>>>>>>> about > >>>>>>>>>>>> that... > >>>>>>>>>>> This is what I remembered. When you responded to the email > >>>>>>>>>>> for > >>>>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>> first > >>>>>>>>>>> time , I had a strong deja vu that you tried addressing > >>>>>>>>>>> this > >>>>>>>>>>> issue > >>>>>>>>>>> yourself in the past (commons-collectios4) - due to > >>>>>>>>>>> different > >>>>>>>>>>> reason. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> is there a specific conflict or problem (or a huge chain of > >>>>>>>>>> dependencies) > >>>>>>>>>> ? > >>>>>>>>> To me it seems the answer to both is no - > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> This is the requirement list - > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> java >= 1.5 > >>>>>>>>> jpackage-utils > >>>>>>>>> rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 > >>>>>>>>> rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1 > >>>>>>>>> rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 > >>>>>>>>> rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) <= 5.2-1 > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Probably a matter of packaging? > >>>>>>>> IIRC, Alon was the one who replied, and the issue was that Jboss > >>>>>>>> included > >>>>>>>> an > >>>>>>>> old version (and we don't have classpath isolation, I guess) > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Greg > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> We would like to avoid maintaining and package components that are > >>>>>>> not > >>>>>>> provider either by el6 or jboss distribution. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> But based on other threads, it seems that I am the only one who > >>>>>>> remained > >>>>>>> trying to push compliance to the old ways, people feel that can > >>>>>>> maintain > >>>>>>> anything anywhere with no effort. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Regards, > >>>>>>> Alon > >>>> Alon, I disagree with your comment (about the "you're the only one" part > >>>> :) > >>>> ) > >>> +1 > >>> > >>> We have three (four if you include PatternFly) ongoing threads about > >>> dependency > >>> issues at the moment, and I hope we all realize that Alon is trying to do > >>> what's best for our project. I certainly empathize with him. He has a > >>> tough > >>> role, and there are a lot of us young'uns who want 'shiny new things' > >>> brought > >>> into the project. I certainly don't have the experience to know about all > >>> the > >>> long term costs of bringing in dependencies into an enterprise project > >>> like > >>> this > >>> -- but I'm learning :) > >> I don't think that motivation to introduce new dependencies is driven by > >> desire to have "shiny new things" (we're not kids, right?) - I think that > >> motivation is driven by actual needs, backed by potential value that might > >> be broght in. For example, better/easier code due to newer version of > >> library. > >> > >> I agree that we should avoid maintaining packages ourselves as much as we > >> can, > >> I think that everyone's in agreement with Alon on that. > >> > >>>> As I wrote - I had a strong deja-vu about that the issue was already > >>>> brought > >>>> up. > >>>> Now that you reminded , I don't think you're the only person who feels > >>>> this > >>>> way. > >>>> I would also like to understand more what it means before jumping to > >>>> conclusions and upgrading to collections4. > >>>> At past I had some issues with another commons project > >>>> (commons-configuration) that had different versions upstream and > >>>> downstream. > >>> I think collections4 is a nonstarter because it's not packaged for EL, > >>> IIUC. > >>> > >>>> I am sure the changes include not just > >>>> "move to generics" and should carefully be considered. > >>>> > >>>>>> If I may clarify, there would be at least two stipulations for > >>>>>> introducing > >>>>>> collections4. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> 1. someone else packages it and maintains it, available in Fedora and > >>>>>> EL, > >>>>>> long term. Quality package. > >>>>> this is what missing, us maintaining a new package just to have more > >>>>> beautiful code is something that can be deferred for now. > >>>>> > >>>>>> 2. JBoss has proper classloader isolation so that, even though JBoss > >>>>>> uses > >>>>>> collections3, a webapp can use collections4. > >>>>> should not be a problem to use both. > >>>>> > >>>>>> I don't know the answer to either question :) > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Seems like minimal gain to me, though. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Greg > >>>>>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> Devel mailing list > >>> [email protected] > >>> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel > >>> > > _______________________________________________ > > Devel mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel > > _______________________________________________ > Devel mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel > _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
