I personally agree that we should only be maintaining a single slice of the version matrix here... a given ORM version against the latest Wildfly version. On Sun, Aug 27, 2017, 7:31 AM Sanne Grinovero <sanne(a)hibernate.org&gt; wrote: > > Hi all, > > WildFly 11 is coming: the version 11.0.0.CR1 was just released last week. > > The jipijapa integration point is slightly different. > > It shouldn't be hard to patch the current ORM build for this, but I'm > wondering if we just want to update the target WF version, or start > producing sets for both WildFly 10 and WildFly 11 ? > > Personally as soon as we can move all integration tests to WildFly 11, > I won't be interested in maintaining WF10 compatibility for the 5.2 > branch of Hibernate ORM (and related projects) so I'd be inclined to > simply update the WF version. > > The motivations: > - people are asking already for ORM modulesets for WF11 > - these modules missing are a blocker for producing modulests for out > other projects, e.g. Hibernate Search > - people are asking for latest Hibernate Search modulesets for WF11 as > well.. > > I'd treat this with urgency: while I don't expect any compatibility > issue with WF11 it would be nice to be able to test it all before it's > released as .Final > > Thanks, > Sanne > _______________________________________________ > hibernate-dev mailing list > hibernate-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev

+1 Thanks Sanne! On Sun, Aug 27, 2017 at 4:06 PM Sanne Grinovero <sanne(a)hibernate.org&gt; wrote: > Thanks Steve! > for reference JIRA and PR: > - https://hibernate.atlassian.net/browse/HHH-11950 > - https://github.com/hibernate/hibernate-orm/pull/1994 > > I also just noticed that supporting only the latest is consistent with > the expectations we set in the documentation. > > Thanks, > Sanne > > > On 27 August 2017 at 17:06, Steve Ebersole <steve(a)hibernate.org&gt; wrote: > > I personally agree that we should only be maintaining a single slice of > the > > version matrix here... a given ORM version against the latest Wildfly > > version. > > > > > > On Sun, Aug 27, 2017, 7:31 AM Sanne Grinovero <sanne(a)hibernate.org&gt; > wrote: > >> > >> Hi all, > >> > >> WildFly 11 is coming: the version 11.0.0.CR1 was just released last > week. > >> > >> The jipijapa integration point is slightly different. > >> > >> It shouldn't be hard to patch the current ORM build for this, but I'm > >> wondering if we just want to update the target WF version, or start > >> producing sets for both WildFly 10 and WildFly 11 ? > >> > >> Personally as soon as we can move all integration tests to WildFly 11, > >> I won't be interested in maintaining WF10 compatibility for the 5.2 > >> branch of Hibernate ORM (and related projects) so I'd be inclined to > >> simply update the WF version. > >> > >> The motivations: > >> - people are asking already for ORM modulesets for WF11 > >> - these modules missing are a blocker for producing modulests for out > >> other projects, e.g. Hibernate Search > >> - people are asking for latest Hibernate Search modulesets for WF11 as > >> well.. > >> > >> I'd treat this with urgency: while I don't expect any compatibility > >> issue with WF11 it would be nice to be able to test it all before it's > >> released as .Final > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Sanne > >> _______________________________________________ > >> hibernate-dev mailing list > >> hibernate-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev > _______________________________________________ hibernate-dev mailing list hibernate-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev

What version of Hibernate does WF 11 include? On Mon, Aug 28, 2017, 5:18 PM Gail Badner <gbadner(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > This should be backported to 5.1 as well, shouldn't it? > > On Sun, Aug 27, 2017 at 2:27 PM, Steve Ebersole <steve(a)hibernate.org&gt; > wrote: > >> +1 >> >> Thanks Sanne! >> >> On Sun, Aug 27, 2017 at 4:06 PM Sanne Grinovero <sanne(a)hibernate.org&gt; >> wrote: >> >> > Thanks Steve! >> > for reference JIRA and PR: >> > - https://hibernate.atlassian.net/browse/HHH-11950 >> > - https://github.com/hibernate/hibernate-orm/pull/1994 >> > >> > I also just noticed that supporting only the latest is consistent with >> > the expectations we set in the documentation. >> > >> > Thanks, >> > Sanne >> > >> > >> > On 27 August 2017 at 17:06, Steve Ebersole <steve(a)hibernate.org&gt; >> wrote: >> > > I personally agree that we should only be maintaining a single slice >> of >> > the >> > > version matrix here... a given ORM version against the latest Wildfly >> > > version. >> > > >> > > >> > > On Sun, Aug 27, 2017, 7:31 AM Sanne Grinovero <sanne(a)hibernate.org&gt; >> > wrote: >> > >> >> > >> Hi all, >> > >> >> > >> WildFly 11 is coming: the version 11.0.0.CR1 was just released last >> > week. >> > >> >> > >> The jipijapa integration point is slightly different. >> > >> >> > >> It shouldn't be hard to patch the current ORM build for this, but >> I'm >> > >> wondering if we just want to update the target WF version, or start >> > >> producing sets for both WildFly 10 and WildFly 11 ? >> > >> >> > >> Personally as soon as we can move all integration tests to WildFly >> 11, >> > >> I won't be interested in maintaining WF10 compatibility for the 5.2 >> > >> branch of Hibernate ORM (and related projects) so I'd be inclined to >> > >> simply update the WF version. >> > >> >> > >> The motivations: >> > >> - people are asking already for ORM modulesets for WF11 >> > >> - these modules missing are a blocker for producing modulests for >> out >> > >> other projects, e.g. Hibernate Search >> > >> - people are asking for latest Hibernate Search modulesets for >> WF11 as >> > >> well.. >> > >> >> > >> I'd treat this with urgency: while I don't expect any compatibility >> > >> issue with WF11 it would be nice to be able to test it all before >> it's >> > >> released as .Final >> > >> >> > >> Thanks, >> > >> Sanne >> > >> _______________________________________________ >> > >> hibernate-dev mailing list >> > >> hibernate-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >> > >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev >> > >> _______________________________________________ >> hibernate-dev mailing list >> hibernate-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev >> > >

Then I think we should update 5.2 as well, but that creates an interesting concern in that the published artifact name would change if I understand correctly because it would change the artifact's classifier from `wildfly-10-dist` to `wildfly-11-dist`. Things that refer to this artifact as a dependency would no longer work.

On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 11:05 AM Gail Badner <gbadner(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > > Hibernate ORM 5.1.x is in WF 11. > > On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 4:20 PM, Steve Ebersole <steve(a)hibernate.org&gt; > wrote: >> >> What version of Hibernate does WF 11 include? >> >> >> On Mon, Aug 28, 2017, 5:18 PM Gail Badner <gbadner(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >>> >>> This should be backported to 5.1 as well, shouldn't it? >>> >>> On Sun, Aug 27, 2017 at 2:27 PM, Steve Ebersole <steve(a)hibernate.org&gt; >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> +1 >>>> >>>> Thanks Sanne! >>>> >>>> On Sun, Aug 27, 2017 at 4:06 PM Sanne Grinovero <sanne(a)hibernate.org&gt; >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> > Thanks Steve! >>>> > for reference JIRA and PR: >>>> > - https://hibernate.atlassian.net/browse/HHH-11950 >>>> > - https://github.com/hibernate/hibernate-orm/pull/1994 >>>> > >>>> > I also just noticed that supporting only the latest is consistent >>>> > with >>>> > the expectations we set in the documentation. >>>> > >>>> > Thanks, >>>> > Sanne >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > On 27 August 2017 at 17:06, Steve Ebersole <steve(a)hibernate.org&gt; >>>> > wrote: >>>> > > I personally agree that we should only be maintaining a single >>>> > > slice of >>>> > the >>>> > > version matrix here... a given ORM version against the latest >>>> > > Wildfly >>>> > > version. >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > On Sun, Aug 27, 2017, 7:31 AM Sanne Grinovero <sanne(a)hibernate.org&gt; >>>> > wrote: >>>> > >> >>>> > >> Hi all, >>>> > >> >>>> > >> WildFly 11 is coming: the version 11.0.0.CR1 was just released >>>> > >> last >>>> > week. >>>> > >> >>>> > >> The jipijapa integration point is slightly different. >>>> > >> >>>> > >> It shouldn't be hard to patch the current ORM build for this, but >>>> > >> I'm >>>> > >> wondering if we just want to update the target WF version, or >>>> > >> start >>>> > >> producing sets for both WildFly 10 and WildFly 11 ? >>>> > >> >>>> > >> Personally as soon as we can move all integration tests to WildFly >>>> > >> 11, >>>> > >> I won't be interested in maintaining WF10 compatibility for the >>>> > >> 5.2 >>>> > >> branch of Hibernate ORM (and related projects) so I'd be inclined >>>> > >> to >>>> > >> simply update the WF version. >>>> > >> >>>> > >> The motivations: >>>> > >> - people are asking already for ORM modulesets for WF11 >>>> > >> - these modules missing are a blocker for producing modulests for >>>> > >> out >>>> > >> other projects, e.g. Hibernate Search >>>> > >> - people are asking for latest Hibernate Search modulesets for >>>> > >> WF11 as >>>> > >> well.. >>>> > >> >>>> > >> I'd treat this with urgency: while I don't expect any >>>> > >> compatibility >>>> > >> issue with WF11 it would be nice to be able to test it all before >>>> > >> it's >>>> > >> released as .Final >>>> > >> >>>> > >> Thanks, >>>> > >> Sanne >>>> > >> _______________________________________________ >>>> > >> hibernate-dev mailing list >>>> > >> hibernate-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>>> > >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev >>>> > >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> hibernate-dev mailing list >>>> hibernate-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev >>> >>> >

On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 10:38 AM Sanne Grinovero <sanne(a)hibernate.org&gt; wrote: > > On 29 August 2017 at 20:28, Steve Ebersole <steve(a)hibernate.org&gt; wrote: > > Then I think we should update 5.2 as well, but that creates an > > interesting > > concern in that the published artifact name would change if I understand > > correctly because it would change the artifact's classifier from > > `wildfly-10-dist` to `wildfly-11-dist`. Things that refer to this > > artifact > > as a dependency would no longer work. > > Sorry but I'm not understanding. To be clear: I only patched master, > so I already updated 5.2 and yes I can confirm that the classifier > changed accordingly. > > I don't see this as a big deal for users, I updated the ORM > documentation accordingly to mention the new classifier. IMO changing > target appserver is not expected to be "as automatic" as changing some > dependencies, and it's unlikely to not be noticed so having to change > the classifier shouldn't be a big deal. Well you are assuming that someone using hibernate-orm-modules going from Hibernate version 5.2.10 to 5.2.10 also wants to go from WF 10 to WF 11. I don't think that is necessarily a valid assumption. This line of thinking clearly targets people wanting to try the latest Hibernate in the latest WF. If that is the only goal, then this works. But it causes problems for people already using `org.hibernate:hibernate-orm-module:5.2.10:wildfly-10-dist` - its not just the version that changed so changing a single ~`hibernateVersion` property somewhere is not enough for a simple upgrade for these people.

My concern is really more along the lines, e.g., of the trouble we ran into with Spring and us dropping hibernate-entity-manager - their BOMs no longer worked as it referred to no-longer-existent artifact. Changing the classifier leads to the same condition.

As I said initially, I agree that 5.2 should be updated. We just need to be clear about the ramifications. On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 11:14 AM Sanne Grinovero <sanne(a)hibernate.org&gt; wrote: > On 30 August 2017 at 16:53, Steve Ebersole <steve(a)hibernate.org&gt; wrote: > > > > On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 10:38 AM Sanne Grinovero <sanne(a)hibernate.org&gt; > > wrote: > >> > >> On 29 August 2017 at 20:28, Steve Ebersole <steve(a)hibernate.org&gt; > wrote: > >> > Then I think we should update 5.2 as well, but that creates an > >> > interesting > >> > concern in that the published artifact name would change if I > understand > >> > correctly because it would change the artifact's classifier from > >> > `wildfly-10-dist` to `wildfly-11-dist`. Things that refer to this > >> > artifact > >> > as a dependency would no longer work. > >> > >> Sorry but I'm not understanding. To be clear: I only patched master, > >> so I already updated 5.2 and yes I can confirm that the classifier > >> changed accordingly. > >> > >> I don't see this as a big deal for users, I updated the ORM > >> documentation accordingly to mention the new classifier. IMO changing > >> target appserver is not expected to be "as automatic" as changing some > >> dependencies, and it's unlikely to not be noticed so having to change > >> the classifier shouldn't be a big deal. > > > > > > Well you are assuming that someone using hibernate-orm-modules going > from > > Hibernate version 5.2.10 to 5.2.10 also wants to go from WF 10 to WF > 11. I > > don't think that is necessarily a valid assumption. This line of > thinking > > clearly targets people wanting to try the latest Hibernate in the > latest WF. > > If that is the only goal, then this works. But it causes problems for > > people already using > > `org.hibernate:hibernate-orm-module:5.2.10:wildfly-10-dist` - its not > just > > the version that changed so changing a single ~`hibernateVersion` > property > > somewhere is not enough for a simple upgrade for these people. > > I'm aware of that and that's why I asked here first. > > The alternative being - like I proposed in my first email - that we > start producing both a modules set for WF10 and WF11 for each release > of the 5.2 branch... no doubt that gives users a bit more flexibility > but it's a strong tradeoff on our maintenance, especially on the time > it takes to test both app servers during each build. > > A complex tradeoff for sure :) > > > My concern is really more along the lines, e.g., of the trouble we ran > into > > with Spring and us dropping hibernate-entity-manager - their BOMs no > longer > > worked as it referred to no-longer-existent artifact. Changing the > > classifier leads to the same condition. > > Understood, except that half of the Java developers in the world > depend on hibernate-entitymanager, while needing to patch WildFly to a > specific micro of ORM 5.2 seems like a very restricted circle of > highly specialized people. > > I'd suggest we take the risk of breaking this and we can reconsider if > someone from this small circle shows up with persuasive arguments. > Let's bear in mind that we started creating these modules for our own > integration testing needs; we made them available to others too but it > clearly states we only maintain this for the latest version of > WildFly. > > Thanks, > Sanne >