Re: [GitHub] [tomee v9] pull request #928: Dependency properties cleanup
It seems the issue arises from the cxf upgrade from 3.5.0 -> 3.5.3 I have reverted this specific upgrade on main and created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-4055 so we have the exception in case have some more time to invest in updating this core dependency. CI builds (main, TOMEE-4053) are triggered. Gruß Richard Am Donnerstag, dem 29.09.2022 um 11:53 + schrieb Zowalla, Richard: > We have some results from two runs, which are close in terms of > failed > test + they look similar to the ones on master ;-) > > Looks like our last dependency update killed a few hundred tests. > > Gruß > Richard > > Am Mittwoch, dem 28.09.2022 um 20:31 +0200 schrieb Swell: > > Thanks for the CI job Richard ! > > > > while it builds i'll clean some props on my own branch using David > > suggestions : > > > > removing api, tck, and impl prefixes and have separate props for > > microprofile api and smallrye impl > > > > -- > > Swell > > > > On Wed, 28 Sept 2022 at 20:21, Zowalla, Richard < > > richard.zowa...@hs-heilbronn.de> wrote: > > > > > Regarding CI: > > > > > > I just pushed Swell's branch as a branch named TOMEE-4053 to the > > > TomEE > > > main repo and we will get some CI results via > > > https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/Tomee/job/TOMEE-4053/ soon (6- > > > 8h) > > > ;-) > > > > > > I have no hard opinion regarding version.foo vs > > > version.groupid.foo > > > as > > > long as we are consistent and every one is fine with the > > > convention > > > chosen. > > > > > > Gruß > > > Richard > > > > > > > > > > > > Am Mittwoch, dem 28.09.2022 um 12:50 -0500 schrieb David Blevins: > > > > Thanks for the proposal and the email! > > > > > > > > I think it's fantastic to get the version strings normalized to > > > > `version.foo`. We started with `foo.version` and gradually > > > > changed to > > > > `version.foo` as that kind of thing became more favored by > > > > Maven > > > > in > > > > general, but we never went back and fixed the old properties so > > > > we > > > > have a mix. Great to see that addressed. The big PR is fine > > > > for > > > > me > > > > -- let's get a CI build as Richard suggests. > > > > > > > > In terms of the format, are we open to keeping it a simple > > > > `version.foo` versus adding various prefixes before the `foo` > > > > part > > > > such as `tomee`, `api` or the groupId? I'll never remember > > > > which > > > > prefix rule goes where and when, so I'll constantly be looking > > > > it > > > > up > > > > and also further (unintentionally) adding to the inconsistency. > > > > > > > > Intellij does have completion for Maven properties. Being able > > > > to > > > > type `version.` and then get a flat list of all the names would > > > > be > > > > fantastic. > > > > > > > > Thoughts? > > > > > > > > > > > > -David > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sep 28, 2022, at 9:25 AM, Swell > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Hi everyone, > > > > > > > > > > The pom.xml of the project uses several properties to > > > > > configure > > > > > dependencies. some of which not used anymore since switching > > > > > from > > > > > geronimo > > > > > to smallrye. > > > > > > > > > > i've been working on removing orphan properties, renaming > > > > > versions > > > > > props on > > > > > the same format whenever i was able. reorganizing a bit. > > > > > > > > > > the proposed PR became a little big bang with almost 100 poms > > > > > impacted, and > > > > > hard to review. > > > > > > > > > > the possible course of action would be collecting opinion > > > > > here > > > > > by > > > > > mail > > > > > before merging, see if it breaks and possibly fix afterward. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for your time. > > > > > -- > > > > > Swell smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Re: [GitHub] [tomee v9] pull request #928: Dependency properties cleanup
We have some results from two runs, which are close in terms of failed test + they look similar to the ones on master ;-) Looks like our last dependency update killed a few hundred tests. Gruß Richard Am Mittwoch, dem 28.09.2022 um 20:31 +0200 schrieb Swell: > Thanks for the CI job Richard ! > > while it builds i'll clean some props on my own branch using David > suggestions : > > removing api, tck, and impl prefixes and have separate props for > microprofile api and smallrye impl > > -- > Swell > > On Wed, 28 Sept 2022 at 20:21, Zowalla, Richard < > richard.zowa...@hs-heilbronn.de> wrote: > > > Regarding CI: > > > > I just pushed Swell's branch as a branch named TOMEE-4053 to the > > TomEE > > main repo and we will get some CI results via > > https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/Tomee/job/TOMEE-4053/ soon (6-8h) > > ;-) > > > > I have no hard opinion regarding version.foo vs version.groupid.foo > > as > > long as we are consistent and every one is fine with the convention > > chosen. > > > > Gruß > > Richard > > > > > > > > Am Mittwoch, dem 28.09.2022 um 12:50 -0500 schrieb David Blevins: > > > Thanks for the proposal and the email! > > > > > > I think it's fantastic to get the version strings normalized to > > > `version.foo`. We started with `foo.version` and gradually > > > changed to > > > `version.foo` as that kind of thing became more favored by Maven > > > in > > > general, but we never went back and fixed the old properties so > > > we > > > have a mix. Great to see that addressed. The big PR is fine for > > > me > > > -- let's get a CI build as Richard suggests. > > > > > > In terms of the format, are we open to keeping it a simple > > > `version.foo` versus adding various prefixes before the `foo` > > > part > > > such as `tomee`, `api` or the groupId? I'll never remember which > > > prefix rule goes where and when, so I'll constantly be looking it > > > up > > > and also further (unintentionally) adding to the inconsistency. > > > > > > Intellij does have completion for Maven properties. Being able to > > > type `version.` and then get a flat list of all the names would > > > be > > > fantastic. > > > > > > Thoughts? > > > > > > > > > -David > > > > > > > > > > On Sep 28, 2022, at 9:25 AM, Swell > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi everyone, > > > > > > > > The pom.xml of the project uses several properties to configure > > > > dependencies. some of which not used anymore since switching > > > > from > > > > geronimo > > > > to smallrye. > > > > > > > > i've been working on removing orphan properties, renaming > > > > versions > > > > props on > > > > the same format whenever i was able. reorganizing a bit. > > > > > > > > the proposed PR became a little big bang with almost 100 poms > > > > impacted, and > > > > hard to review. > > > > > > > > the possible course of action would be collecting opinion here > > > > by > > > > mail > > > > before merging, see if it breaks and possibly fix afterward. > > > > > > > > Thanks for your time. > > > > -- > > > > Swell smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Re: [GitHub] [tomee v9] pull request #928: Dependency properties cleanup
> On Sep 28, 2022, at 1:26 PM, Swell wrote: > > about the prefixes, there could be ambiguities or collisions when using > short names, > * group: 'org.apache.tomee', name: 'jakartaee-api', version: '9.1-M2' > * group: 'jakarta.platform', name: 'jakarta.jakartaee-api', version: '9.1.0' > the property would be ambiguous. > > but i agree we should keep things simple, maybe one rule with some room if > it stays unambiguous. > > groupid or equivalent seems a good compromise to me, Understood and think it's great to think things through thoroughly (gee, that's a lot of t-words, LOL). Ultimately, anything that isn't the full groupId and artifactId could have a conflict. All the Apache Commons libs stuff (math, lang, dbcp, etc) use one groupId but all have different artifacts and versions. In the end we're still making stuff up, so IMO, let's make up a short name that's easy to find with IDE completion. That said, it's a small detail so ultimately anything unique is fine. We change things at any time, so I'm willing to try almost anything for a while and see how it goes. -David smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Re: [GitHub] [tomee v9] pull request #928: Dependency properties cleanup
Thanks for the CI job Richard ! while it builds i'll clean some props on my own branch using David suggestions : removing api, tck, and impl prefixes and have separate props for microprofile api and smallrye impl -- Swell On Wed, 28 Sept 2022 at 20:21, Zowalla, Richard < richard.zowa...@hs-heilbronn.de> wrote: > Regarding CI: > > I just pushed Swell's branch as a branch named TOMEE-4053 to the TomEE > main repo and we will get some CI results via > https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/Tomee/job/TOMEE-4053/ soon (6-8h) ;-) > > I have no hard opinion regarding version.foo vs version.groupid.foo as > long as we are consistent and every one is fine with the convention > chosen. > > Gruß > Richard > > > > Am Mittwoch, dem 28.09.2022 um 12:50 -0500 schrieb David Blevins: > > Thanks for the proposal and the email! > > > > I think it's fantastic to get the version strings normalized to > > `version.foo`. We started with `foo.version` and gradually changed to > > `version.foo` as that kind of thing became more favored by Maven in > > general, but we never went back and fixed the old properties so we > > have a mix. Great to see that addressed. The big PR is fine for me > > -- let's get a CI build as Richard suggests. > > > > In terms of the format, are we open to keeping it a simple > > `version.foo` versus adding various prefixes before the `foo` part > > such as `tomee`, `api` or the groupId? I'll never remember which > > prefix rule goes where and when, so I'll constantly be looking it up > > and also further (unintentionally) adding to the inconsistency. > > > > Intellij does have completion for Maven properties. Being able to > > type `version.` and then get a flat list of all the names would be > > fantastic. > > > > Thoughts? > > > > > > -David > > > > > > > On Sep 28, 2022, at 9:25 AM, Swell > > > wrote: > > > > > > Hi everyone, > > > > > > The pom.xml of the project uses several properties to configure > > > dependencies. some of which not used anymore since switching from > > > geronimo > > > to smallrye. > > > > > > i've been working on removing orphan properties, renaming versions > > > props on > > > the same format whenever i was able. reorganizing a bit. > > > > > > the proposed PR became a little big bang with almost 100 poms > > > impacted, and > > > hard to review. > > > > > > the possible course of action would be collecting opinion here by > > > mail > > > before merging, see if it breaks and possibly fix afterward. > > > > > > Thanks for your time. > > > -- > > > Swell > > > >
Re: [GitHub] [tomee v9] pull request #928: Dependency properties cleanup
about the prefixes, there could be ambiguities or collisions when using short names, * group: 'org.apache.tomee', name: 'jakartaee-api', version: '9.1-M2' * group: 'jakarta.platform', name: 'jakarta.jakartaee-api', version: '9.1.0' the property would be ambiguous. but i agree we should keep things simple, maybe one rule with some room if it stays unambiguous. groupid or equivalent seems a good compromise to me, listening to your suggestions On Wed, 28 Sept 2022 at 19:51, David Blevins wrote: > Thanks for the proposal and the email! > > I think it's fantastic to get the version strings normalized to > `version.foo`. We started with `foo.version` and gradually changed to > `version.foo` as that kind of thing became more favored by Maven in > general, but we never went back and fixed the old properties so we have a > mix. Great to see that addressed. The big PR is fine for me -- let's get > a CI build as Richard suggests. > > In terms of the format, are we open to keeping it a simple `version.foo` > versus adding various prefixes before the `foo` part such as `tomee`, `api` > or the groupId? I'll never remember which prefix rule goes where and when, > so I'll constantly be looking it up and also further (unintentionally) > adding to the inconsistency. > > Intellij does have completion for Maven properties. Being able to type > `version.` and then get a flat list of all the names would be fantastic. > > Thoughts? > > > -David > > > > On Sep 28, 2022, at 9:25 AM, Swell wrote: > > > > Hi everyone, > > > > The pom.xml of the project uses several properties to configure > > dependencies. some of which not used anymore since switching from > geronimo > > to smallrye. > > > > i've been working on removing orphan properties, renaming versions props > on > > the same format whenever i was able. reorganizing a bit. > > > > the proposed PR became a little big bang with almost 100 poms impacted, > and > > hard to review. > > > > the possible course of action would be collecting opinion here by mail > > before merging, see if it breaks and possibly fix afterward. > > > > Thanks for your time. > > -- > > Swell > >
Re: [GitHub] [tomee v9] pull request #928: Dependency properties cleanup
Regarding CI: I just pushed Swell's branch as a branch named TOMEE-4053 to the TomEE main repo and we will get some CI results via https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/Tomee/job/TOMEE-4053/ soon (6-8h) ;-) I have no hard opinion regarding version.foo vs version.groupid.foo as long as we are consistent and every one is fine with the convention chosen. Gruß Richard Am Mittwoch, dem 28.09.2022 um 12:50 -0500 schrieb David Blevins: > Thanks for the proposal and the email! > > I think it's fantastic to get the version strings normalized to > `version.foo`. We started with `foo.version` and gradually changed to > `version.foo` as that kind of thing became more favored by Maven in > general, but we never went back and fixed the old properties so we > have a mix. Great to see that addressed. The big PR is fine for me > -- let's get a CI build as Richard suggests. > > In terms of the format, are we open to keeping it a simple > `version.foo` versus adding various prefixes before the `foo` part > such as `tomee`, `api` or the groupId? I'll never remember which > prefix rule goes where and when, so I'll constantly be looking it up > and also further (unintentionally) adding to the inconsistency. > > Intellij does have completion for Maven properties. Being able to > type `version.` and then get a flat list of all the names would be > fantastic. > > Thoughts? > > > -David > > > > On Sep 28, 2022, at 9:25 AM, Swell > > wrote: > > > > Hi everyone, > > > > The pom.xml of the project uses several properties to configure > > dependencies. some of which not used anymore since switching from > > geronimo > > to smallrye. > > > > i've been working on removing orphan properties, renaming versions > > props on > > the same format whenever i was able. reorganizing a bit. > > > > the proposed PR became a little big bang with almost 100 poms > > impacted, and > > hard to review. > > > > the possible course of action would be collecting opinion here by > > mail > > before merging, see if it breaks and possibly fix afterward. > > > > Thanks for your time. > > -- > > Swell > smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Re: [GitHub] [tomee v9] pull request #928: Dependency properties cleanup
Thanks for the proposal and the email! I think it's fantastic to get the version strings normalized to `version.foo`. We started with `foo.version` and gradually changed to `version.foo` as that kind of thing became more favored by Maven in general, but we never went back and fixed the old properties so we have a mix. Great to see that addressed. The big PR is fine for me -- let's get a CI build as Richard suggests. In terms of the format, are we open to keeping it a simple `version.foo` versus adding various prefixes before the `foo` part such as `tomee`, `api` or the groupId? I'll never remember which prefix rule goes where and when, so I'll constantly be looking it up and also further (unintentionally) adding to the inconsistency. Intellij does have completion for Maven properties. Being able to type `version.` and then get a flat list of all the names would be fantastic. Thoughts? -David > On Sep 28, 2022, at 9:25 AM, Swell wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > The pom.xml of the project uses several properties to configure > dependencies. some of which not used anymore since switching from geronimo > to smallrye. > > i've been working on removing orphan properties, renaming versions props on > the same format whenever i was able. reorganizing a bit. > > the proposed PR became a little big bang with almost 100 poms impacted, and > hard to review. > > the possible course of action would be collecting opinion here by mail > before merging, see if it breaks and possibly fix afterward. > > Thanks for your time. > -- > Swell smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Re: [GitHub] [tomee v9] pull request #928: Dependency properties cleanup
Hi, yeah, such PRs are difficult to review by nature :) Thanks for the effort to make it consistent and more clear! Personally, I am fine with the proposal. If we don't want to do the "big bang integration" approach, we can easily setup a CI job on jenkins (similar to our full build by simply cloning it) and compare the results with current master. The only thing we would need to do is to get the branch from Swell's fork and push it to a branch on the TomEE repo. Would take only a couple of minutes + 6-8 hours ci cycle time. Wdyt? Gruß Richard Am Mittwoch, dem 28.09.2022 um 16:25 +0200 schrieb Swell: > Hi everyone, > > The pom.xml of the project uses several properties to configure > dependencies. some of which not used anymore since switching from > geronimo > to smallrye. > > i've been working on removing orphan properties, renaming versions > props on > the same format whenever i was able. reorganizing a bit. > > the proposed PR became a little big bang with almost 100 poms > impacted, and > hard to review. > > the possible course of action would be collecting opinion here by > mail > before merging, see if it breaks and possibly fix afterward. > > Thanks for your time. > -- > Swell smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
[GitHub] [tomee v9] pull request #928: Dependency properties cleanup
Hi everyone, The pom.xml of the project uses several properties to configure dependencies. some of which not used anymore since switching from geronimo to smallrye. i've been working on removing orphan properties, renaming versions props on the same format whenever i was able. reorganizing a bit. the proposed PR became a little big bang with almost 100 poms impacted, and hard to review. the possible course of action would be collecting opinion here by mail before merging, see if it breaks and possibly fix afterward. Thanks for your time. -- Swell
