Hi Sanne, I had the same thought a few days ago. At Open Wide, we used to follow the ORM versions very closely and we usually had a corresponding Search version very soon. I agree we need to release something compatible with ORM 5.2 sooner rather than later. I understand your concern about bringing Elasticsearch to WildFly users but it feels quite weird for a "product" version to be the reference for our community work. IMHO, it would make more sense to have our main development efforts on a community release backed by 5.2 and eventually backport the Elasticsearch work to 5.6 and make a 5.6 release if it ends up to be useful for product.

-- Guillaume On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 3:11 PM, Sanne Grinovero <sanne(a)hibernate.org&gt; wrote: > Hi all, > as you might be aware, ORM 5.2 made some rather radical internal work, > and the latest Hibernate Search releases aren't compatible. > > So far, business as usual: we typically simply catch up on the next minor. > > The problem is that normally Hibernate Search releases are time-boxed > - with us only merging new features when they are ready - so that we > can trigger a release as needed, as contingency required. > > However currently we switched temporarily to a less desirable "we ship > when it's ready" as the Elasticsearch integration couldn't possibly be > developed by a single person in a feature branch, so in short we're > not in a position to "just release" it, as it's not ready and this > will take another month (optimistically). This would position > Hibernate Search 5.6 in September. > > We'd also want to have WildFly users have a chance to use this new > Elasticsearch feature, which ties us to make this release compatible > with ORM 5.0 and 5.1. > > So Hibernate ORM 5.2 users who need Hibernate Search will need to wait > for Search version 5.7, which in timelines would mean this fall.. way > too far ahead. > > (I tried to figure out a way to make Search master compatible with > both, but that's just not possible: it's either/or, barring an > outrageous amount of work which I'd rather spend in finishing 5.6 and > move on do do the migration properly..) > > On HSEARCH-2296 [1] James proposed we could already publish a 5.7 SNAPSHOT. > > Assuming we can set the right expectations, what would you think of > this idea to branch a 5.7 already even though 5.6 isn't done? > We could even call it Alpha1 and tag appropriately. The goal is of > course to make sure people have at least something they can test with > and make progress while we put our stuff together. > > The downside is of course that all remaining work on 5.6 will have to > be regularly rebased and applied to 5.7 too. Considering we won't do > any other changes on 5.7 I don't expect this to hurt too much. > > Thanks, > Sanne > > 1 - https://hibernate.atlassian.net/browse/HSEARCH-2296 > _______________________________________________ > hibernate-dev mailing list > hibernate-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev

Hi, What's still missing from releasing 5.6 (compatible with ORM 5.0/5.1), labelling the ES support as a "tech preview"? I'd hope we could do such release rather quickly after you re-focus from OGM to HSEARCH? Calling the ES support a "tech preview" will allow us to release something a bit less polished than we'd usually do it (e.g. we can omit some corner cases as not supported yet for the time being), thus saving some time. It has been a while since I last looked at the ES bits, but I'd expect it to be ready for that in rather short time? Then we can do a ORM-5.2-compatible Alpha release of HSEARCH 5.7 quickly afterwards, while continuing to improve the ES support, based on user's feedback (which I expect to come in more frequently once 5.6 is Final rather than Beta). I'd prefer to avoid parallel branches of development as far as possible, as the required merging drains energy we better could spend otherwise. --Gunnar 2016-08-11 15:52 GMT+02:00 Sanne Grinovero <sanne(a)hibernate.org&gt;: > > On 11 August 2016 at 14:36, Guillaume Smet <guillaume.smet(a)gmail.com&gt; > wrote: > > Hi Sanne, > > > > I had the same thought a few days ago. At Open Wide, we used to follow > > the ORM versions very closely and we usually had a corresponding > > Search version very soon. > > > > I agree we need to release something compatible with ORM 5.2 sooner > > rather than later. > > > > I understand your concern about bringing Elasticsearch to WildFly > > users but it feels quite weird for a "product" version to be the > > reference for our community work. > > > > IMHO, it would make more sense to have our main development efforts on > > a community release backed by 5.2 and eventually backport the > > Elasticsearch work to 5.6 and make a 5.6 release if it ends up to be > > useful for product. > > I'm not sure why you refer to it as "product", that's not my intent at > all. > > WildFly is a community OSS project, so: > - we have several users who are stuck to whatever is compatible with WF > - several other users stuck on older versions of ORM > - some people eager to try latest ORM > > My goal here is just to try satisfy all of them; not least it would be > nice to > have the next WF version to include the Hibernate Search/Elasticsearch > integration out of the box. > > Red Hat's supported products might take some of these things onboard in > future, > but that's much further in time and they will definitely only take on > combinations > which have proven themselves in freely available distributions first.. so > yes > in a way you're right to consider this a pre-requisite, but it's not > sufficient > and it's affecting a very different timeline and audience. > > So back to timelines, if I upgrade 5.6 today to use ORM 5.2 already then > we'll > prevent all people using ORM 5.0 and 5.1, and also all people running on > WF > from benefiting of the Elasticsearch features. > > Vice-versa, if we release 5.6 with Elasticsearch support and then follow > up > quickly with a very similar 5.7 which just introduces the changes to catch > up with ORM 5.2, then we have something good for everyone. > > Thanks, > Sanne > > > > > -- > > Guillaume > > > > On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 3:11 PM, Sanne Grinovero <sanne(a)hibernate.org&gt; > > wrote: > >> Hi all, > >> as you might be aware, ORM 5.2 made some rather radical internal work, > >> and the latest Hibernate Search releases aren't compatible. > >> > >> So far, business as usual: we typically simply catch up on the next > >> minor. > >> > >> The problem is that normally Hibernate Search releases are time-boxed > >> - with us only merging new features when they are ready - so that we > >> can trigger a release as needed, as contingency required. > >> > >> However currently we switched temporarily to a less desirable "we ship > >> when it's ready" as the Elasticsearch integration couldn't possibly be > >> developed by a single person in a feature branch, so in short we're > >> not in a position to "just release" it, as it's not ready and this > >> will take another month (optimistically). This would position > >> Hibernate Search 5.6 in September. > >> > >> We'd also want to have WildFly users have a chance to use this new > >> Elasticsearch feature, which ties us to make this release compatible > >> with ORM 5.0 and 5.1. > >> > >> So Hibernate ORM 5.2 users who need Hibernate Search will need to wait > >> for Search version 5.7, which in timelines would mean this fall.. way > >> too far ahead. > >> > >> (I tried to figure out a way to make Search master compatible with > >> both, but that's just not possible: it's either/or, barring an > >> outrageous amount of work which I'd rather spend in finishing 5.6 and > >> move on do do the migration properly..) > >> > >> On HSEARCH-2296 [1] James proposed we could already publish a 5.7 > >> SNAPSHOT. > >> > >> Assuming we can set the right expectations, what would you think of > >> this idea to branch a 5.7 already even though 5.6 isn't done? > >> We could even call it Alpha1 and tag appropriately. The goal is of > >> course to make sure people have at least something they can test with > >> and make progress while we put our stuff together. > >> > >> The downside is of course that all remaining work on 5.6 will have to > >> be regularly rebased and applied to 5.7 too. Considering we won't do > >> any other changes on 5.7 I don't expect this to hurt too much. > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Sanne > >> > >> 1 - https://hibernate.atlassian.net/browse/HSEARCH-2296 > >> _______________________________________________ > >> 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