<div dir="ltr">Sorry, I dropped the list on my last post; see below...</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Dec 5, 2017 at 7:42 AM, Brian Stansberry <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:brian.stansberry@redhat.com" target="_blank">brian.stansberry@redhat.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><span class="">On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 8:33 PM, Stuart Douglas <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:stuart.w.douglas@gmail.com" target="_blank">stuart.w.douglas@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><br><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote"><span>On Tue, Dec 5, 2017 at 3:40 AM, Brian Stansberry <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:brian.stansberry@redhat.com" target="_blank">brian.stansberry@redhat.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">Great. :)<div><br></div><div>One thing I think we need to do is figure out how to get custom TCK runs for PR branches. The TCK is a big part of our test coverage, and one way to not "use master as a test bed" is to get a check of a branch on the TCK before we merge it.</div><div><br></div><div>I know we've gotten TCK runs of ad-hoc branches before, so by "figure out" I mean work out how to make that not overly painful, come to some sort of consensus on when it's worthwhile, etc.</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div></span><div>I think if we were going to do this it should probably be something reviewers can ask for on specific PR. The TCK uses a *lot* more resources than a standard CI run, so we need to make sure we limit it to cases where it is required.</div></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div></span><div>Yes, for sure we wouldn't want to do this broadly; submitters or reviewers should ask.</div><div><br></div><div>I had in mind a fairly limited set of scenarios. Things like major/minor version bumps of the big EE components, or some large scale change with fairly clear TCK implications where we'd be reluctant to undo the change if it caused a problem. *Perhaps* core upgrades, as those somewhat amount to the latter. And then late in the cycle some last minute fixes where we sometimes ask for a custom run anyway.</div><div><br></div><div>Doing custom runs doesn't buy much for small changes where if they fail TCK after merge we just revert them or we can spend a few days sorting the problem without stressing out. </div><div><div class="h5"><div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><span class="m_2947118481355933710HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><div><br></div><div>Stuart</div></font></span><div><div class="m_2947118481355933710h5"><div><br></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div><br></div><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><div><div class="m_2947118481355933710m_6315110034380708068h5">On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 10:04 AM, Alessio Soldano <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:asoldano@redhat.com" target="_blank">asoldano@redhat.com</a>></span> wrote:<br></div></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div><div class="m_2947118481355933710m_6315110034380708068h5"><div dir="ltr"><div><div>There you go... PR updated to consume the same api jar now released as final.<br><br></div>Cheers<span class="m_2947118481355933710m_6315110034380708068m_2405932886770538781HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br></font></span></div><span class="m_2947118481355933710m_6315110034380708068m_2405932886770538781HOEnZb"><font color="#888888">Alessio<br></font></span></div><div class="m_2947118481355933710m_6315110034380708068m_2405932886770538781HOEnZb"><div class="m_2947118481355933710m_6315110034380708068m_2405932886770538781h5"><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 3:30 PM, David Lloyd <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:david.lloyd@redhat.com" target="_blank">david.lloyd@redhat.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span>On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 5:50 PM, Alessio Soldano <<a href="mailto:asoldano@redhat.com" target="_blank">asoldano@redhat.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> As suggested by Brian, I'd like to draw attention to the discussion on<br>
> <a href="https://github.com/wildfly/wildfly/pull/10604" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://github.com/wildfly/wil<wbr>dfly/pull/10604</a> .<br>
> The PR is an upgrade of the webservices stack, including JBossWS, Apache<br>
> CXF, JAXB-RI and JAXB API. In particular, the JAXB upgrade is for EE8 and<br>
> better JDK 9 compatibility.<br>
> Now, due to the upgrade of the JAXB API spec jar, the PR is essentially<br>
> stalled since 20 days; the new spec is released as an alpha (as it's been<br>
> tested within JBossWS only) and that does not satisfy a rule that requires<br>
> any artifact being pulled to be Final.<br>
> We're talking about a spec jar, we could simply re-tag that as Final,<br>
> chances are we won't need changes any time soon there anyway, but as Tomaz<br>
> pointed out, in principle that would be dishonest.<br>
<br>
</span>My opinion is that you should go ahead and make a .Final tag. In the<br>
(unlikely?) event that the spec has to be modified for some reason, I<br>
think you could make a 1.0.1.Final tag and call it a "bug fix".<br>
<br>
The alternative is to simply wait. I don't think there is any middle position.<br>
<span><br>
> While I see the point in requiring that only sufficiently stable upgrades<br>
> are applied to the codebase, I'm wondering whether, maybe, we're going a bit<br>
> too far with the rules. Brian wrote on this topic: "how to determine that<br>
> something is good enough to go in without using master as a test bed" ?<br>
<br>
</span>I don't think we are; I agree with the policy as it stands. If you<br>
look at it in terms of being able to release at any time, then it<br>
follows that everything _must_ be stable.<br>
<span class="m_2947118481355933710m_6315110034380708068m_2405932886770538781m_-772766702957746336HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
--<br>
- DML<br>
</font></span></blockquote></div><br></div>
</div></div><br></div></div><span>______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
wildfly-dev mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:wildfly-dev@lists.jboss.org" target="_blank">wildfly-dev@lists.jboss.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/wildfly-dev" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.jboss.org/mailma<wbr>n/listinfo/wildfly-dev</a><br></span></blockquote></div><span class="m_2947118481355933710m_6315110034380708068HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div class="m_2947118481355933710m_6315110034380708068m_2405932886770538781gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr">Brian Stansberry<div>Manager, Senior Principal Software Engineer</div><div>Red Hat</div></div></div>
</font></span></div></div>
<br>______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
wildfly-dev mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:wildfly-dev@lists.jboss.org" target="_blank">wildfly-dev@lists.jboss.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/wildfly-dev" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.jboss.org/mailma<wbr>n/listinfo/wildfly-dev</a><br></blockquote></div></div></div><br></div></div>
</blockquote></div></div></div><div><div class="h5"><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div class="m_2947118481355933710gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr">Brian Stansberry<div>Manager, Senior Principal Software Engineer</div><div>Red Hat</div></div></div>
</div></div></div></div>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr">Brian Stansberry<div>Manager, Senior Principal Software Engineer</div><div>Red Hat</div></div></div>
</div>