If upstream doesn't want to support our features, is there any way to refactor said features into its own library that works with an unpatched upstream xstream? Otherwise, I suppose if we maintained a fork that was regularly merged with upstream would be better than just forking a version at one point and never backporting updates from then on.
On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 6:32 AM Oleg Nenashev <[email protected]> wrote: > I think it is useful, we just need to update the documentation to clarify > what is the purpose of the repo. > It seems that we will have to go forward with a custom for of XStream in > meantime, but upstreaming our patches totally makes sense (ones which can > be upstreamed). > > BR, Oleg > > > On Tuesday, December 11, 2018 at 1:34:06 PM UTC+1, nicolas de loof wrote: >> >> As discussed already here >> <https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/jenkinsci-dev/xstream-fork%7Csort:date/jenkinsci-dev/nZvl6Ra3P-M/7PPE3zX4CwAJ>, >> the *-fork repository have been created so that the jenkins flavours of >> those library are actual forks from upstreams, so we can better propose our >> patches and/or pull upstream fixes. >> Now, if you feel this is useless, fell free to remove the unnecessary >> ones. >> >> Le mar. 11 déc. 2018 à 13:31, Oliver Gondža <[email protected]> a écrit : >> >>> On 11/12/2018 12.55, Oleg Nenashev wrote: >>> > `xstream` is what we use in Jenkins nowadays. >>> > `xstream-fork` has been created by Nicolas de Loof at some point, but >>> > this repository has never been updated to incorporate Jenkins-specific >>> > patches. And I am not sure whether it has passed the full test cycle. >>> > There is a splitbrain between the repos, and their README files are >>> > misleading. Since 2016 there were pull requests submitted against both >>> > repos, and it made the situation worse. >>> > >>> > Whomever wants to update XStream, we firstly need to resolve the >>> > splitbrain issue. Switching from a custom XStream fork to the official >>> > XStream releases is something we should do IMHO, but it needs to be >>> > tested a LOT before we do it. Any XStream change may cause Jenkins >>> > startup issues and, potentially, security issues if JEP-200 >>> classfilter >>> > hooks stop working. >>> >>> Well, that surely is a noble goal but I am not sure if doable ta all. My >>> impressions, mostly from https://github.com/x-stream/xstream/pull/106, >>> are this will not happen. >>> >>> -- >>> oliver >>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> Groups "Jenkins Developers" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>> an email to [email protected]. >>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/8b283fea-a325-ce21-4dac-f2c50d4df8ef%40gmail.com >>> . >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>> >> >> >> -- >> Nicolas De Loof >> > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Jenkins Developers" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/6d040308-a013-492b-85c7-4a2b015e1c67%40googlegroups.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/6d040308-a013-492b-85c7-4a2b015e1c67%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- Matt Sicker Software Engineer, CloudBees -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Jenkins Developers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/CAEot4ozWUwYCP35pFBDtkbm34Qrx%3DYQOvqmFB4EBa5TmJs3Rxw%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
