I'd like to organize a bit the work for the future month or such on
I've created 3.1.0.Beta1 version on jira and started setting that as
target for some issues / feature requests.
Please take some time to look at jira, review what's there, self-assign
/ un-assign jiras and schedule them for 3.1.0.Beta1. We should try to
come up with a reasonable payload for ~ 1 month of development.
Also note there are currently a lot of jiras scheduled for 3.0.17.Final,
but it does not look very likely that they'll all be solved in few days
(that is when we'll release 3.0.17.Final). So please update/reschedule them.
With more people actively working on the project we should try to use
JIRA properly for tracking progress on releases.
P.S. the comment to use on commits so that they can be automatically
linked to jiras (I still have to ask for the integration to be enabled
though, will do that soon) is "[RESTEASY-XYZ] blah blah", including
Web Service Lead, JBoss
Sure, please keep track by creating a jira
Il 09/05/2016 16:46, Rebecca Searls ha scritto:
> Hi Alessio,
> I see quite a few deprecated classes in the foundation code of Resteasy.
> A future task might be to clean this up.
Web Service Lead, JBoss
considering all the improvements in the build and testsuite recently
discussed here as well as the development for JAX-RS 2.1, I believe it's
time to create a 3.0.x branch and open up the master to future stuff.
Any comment? Clearly this comes with the need to deal with merges of bug
fixes to the 3.0.x branch...
Web Service Lead, JBoss
Moving the discussion to the mailing list ++ adding few notes about the project structure and TS.
- why is there one module jaxrs in the root of repo - https://github.com/resteasy/Resteasy ?
- there are too many modules (in root jaxrs module) from my perspective
-- multi module project structure can affect build time
-- find . | grep pom.xml | wc -l reports 226 pom.xml files
-- find . | grep pom.xml | grep -v arquillian | grep -v exam | grep -v test | wc -l reports 58 pom.xml files
- not clear where is the real code and what is just add-odd like examples, book stuff
- naming of modules in not in sync, some are starting resteasy-*, some do not have such prefix
- commit messages do not follow same/similar format - see https://github.com/resteasy/Resteasy/commits/master
-- I would expect jira id at the beginning of the commit message, it's there sometime but in different format - e.g. RESTEASY-1328 vs. [RESTEASY-1331]
- massive commit message like https://github.com/resteasy/Resteasy/commit/fdd1f9f31edb894fa6f8684f26082...
- commit related to RESTEASY-1323 are really "fun"
-- one fix in code (4 lines removed) + two tests done in 7 commits :(
-- these commits should have been squashed
- will leave this to Tomaz :)
- unit tests are mixed with integration tests
-- integration tests should be in separate module
-- tests should be running in different maven phases
- there are only few tests against WF
- such tests are not executed against latest WF, but mainly against WF 8
- I would like to see ARQ + WF10+ and get rid of tjws
EAP 7 situation for TS:
- we migrated upstream ts to use ARQ and run against EAP 7 and not tjws
- we discovered half of reported issues thanks to this migrated TS, these issues wouldn't be noticed bu community TS executed against tjws
-- 19 from 38 jiras - https://issues.jboss.org/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20JBEAP%20AND%20issuet...
- we will keep this TS for 7.0.z
- we would like to consume & prod-patch upstream (ARQ + WF based) TS for the future releases
Upstream and QE specific TS should somehow converge into a single one.
My feeling is that (upstream) TS should be a bit isolated from the rest to make it easier for QE to test against products - like EAP.
Something similar what is in JBWS and maybe even beyond - no dependency on parent to have deps clearly defined.
For JBWS we consume upstream ts, patch it little bit + use prod based dependencies.
----- Original Message -----
> Hey Alessio,
> yes setting up mailing list or even better forums on developer.jboss.org
> would be great.
> for the changes I had in mind from top of my head
> - restructure project to move it one folder up so we, get rid of "jaxrs"
> folder, but that can be done later
> - unify versions of jetty used for tests
> - make project build on various platforms and be able to release new
> version maven-release-plugin
> - get rid of tjws
> - get rid of book
> - probably best to move it to different repo
> - think about examples, maybe move them to different repo or clean them up
> so build would work properly.
> and lots of other ideas, but that would just be cleaning up the codebase so
> it would be easier to work from there.
> But yes, lets talk about it next week, as I also have some stuff to finish
> this week.
> On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 9:38 PM, Alessio Soldano <asoldano(a)redhat.com>
> > Hi Rostislav, hi Tomaz,
> > thanks for the references. We'll have to go and parse the changes (and
> > also see what still applies and what would be out-of-date ;-) ).
> > Generally speaking, why not, let's listen to what "stage 0" tasks you have
> > in mind. I'm very busy till the end of the week, but I hope to have time to
> > spend on this next week. I'm still fixing few things with the team,
> > including having jboss mailing lists for the project.. if it makes sense to
> > you, I would propose to have some discussion on the proposed tasks on a dev
> > mailing list, ok?
> > Cheers
> > Alessio
> > Il 28/04/2016 18:10, Rostislav Svoboda ha scritto:
> >> Hi Alessio.
> >> Several months ago I spoke with Tomaz about RESTEasy and Tomaz's effort
> >> with project cleanup + version sync. For example
> >> https://github.com/resteasy/Resteasy/commit/1f95cefc716d88533551c282977aa...
> >> was merged, probably some more ideas are waiting for sunlight in branches
> >> like https://github.com/ctomc/Resteasy/tree/build-cleanup
> >> I pinged Tomaz today because of that and we spoke a bit about RESTEasy,
> >> Tomaz has some ideas for few "stage 0" tasks that should be done before
> >> anything else is going on. He [CCed to confirm that ;)] is also wiling to
> >> take few days to work on it if we agree on them being merged.
> >> So here we go, discussion can begin. Hope RESTEasy project structure will
> >> be in good condition soon!
> >> Cheers.
> >> Rostislav
> > --
> > Alessio Soldano
> > Web Service Lead, JBoss
My email get blocked because I sent screenshots :(
Anyway let me resend it by stripping the pictures in below :-)
- Weinan Li
> On May 9, 2016, at 11:18 AM, Weinan Li <weli(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> Hi Alessio and Jim,
> Yes Travis can build different branches:
> <resteasy:Resteasy - Travis CI.png>
> @Alessio, using your account logging into travis-ci and it will show you the repositories. Because you are collaborator so you can see the settings:
> <Settings - resteasy:Resteasy - Travis CI.png>
> - Weinan Li
>> On May 7, 2016, at 4:45 AM, Alessio Soldano <asoldano(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>> Do you already know that Travis CI won't run the build/testsuite for
>> branches? Otherwise we could simply go ahead using it.
>> Il 06/05/2016 12:28, Jim Ma ha scritto:
>>> So we still need to find a place to run 3.0.x build ? Is there any
>>> capacity on jbossws qa machine to run resteasy 3.0.x build ?
>>> On 05/06/2016 05:49 PM, Alessio Soldano wrote:
>>>> considering all the improvements in the build and testsuite recently
>>>> discussed here as well as the development for JAX-RS 2.1, I believe it's
>>>> time to create a 3.0.x branch and open up the master to future stuff.
>>>> Any comment? Clearly this comes with the need to deal with merges of bug
>>>> fixes to the 3.0.x branch...
>> Alessio Soldano
>> Web Service Lead, JBoss
>> resteasy-dev mailing list
Forwarding to mailing list.
My question: is it really necessary to write test to RESTEASY-TEST-WF10
now? QE has prepared test in qe-internal-resteasy-ts for this issue. And
our ts may be joined into resteasy upstream repository in future (see
mail from Katka (kanovotn(a)redhat.com) on resteasy-dev(a)lists.jboss.org).
On 05/06/2016 12:41 AM, Ron Sigal wrote:
> Hi Martin,
> Hmmm. resteasy-spring isn't in the distro zip file. Weinan, do you
> remember why?
> On 05/03/2016 03:35 AM, Martin Stefanko wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> I managed to provide a fix for the issue . I am currently trying
>> to integrate Marek's reproducer as an arquillian test into RESTEasy.
>> I am using RESTEASY-TEST-WF10 as a starter for this test. It
>> downloads the WF server into the target/wildfly directory. My problem
>> is that I changed resteasy-jaxrs and resteasy-spring modules (changed
>> in 3.0.17.Final-SNAPSHOT). The mentioned server uses the right
>> version 3.0.17.Final-SNAPSHOT for resteasy-jaxrs, but for the
>> resteasy-spring it uses the bundled version 3.0.14.Final (see the
>> I need to use resteasy-spring in version 3.0.17.Final-SNAPSHOT in
>> order to run the test but I don't have access to change it. It
>> probably requires the server rebuild.
>> Any help will be appreciated :).
>> Thank you.
>>  https://issues.jboss.org/browse/RESTEASY-1287
>> Martin Stefanko
>> Associate Software Engineer
>> JBoss Sustaining Engineering Team
>> Red Hat Czech s.r.o.
Current integration tests in resteasy are distributed between many modules and most of them are not using Wildfly (mostly TJWS).
We have created integration testsuite based on resteasy upstream tests which runs on Wildfly/EAP.
The proposal is following:
* join integration testsuite into resteasy upstream repository (as separate module):
> Ideally, every test that is meant to be run before a PR should be part
> of the project build, perhaps not triggered by default but still you
> could activate it with a maven profile.
* clean the duplicated tests - tests running on tjws, tests in arquillian module which are covered by integration tests against WF 8.
For sure it will take time to merge all the current tests.
Let us know any thoughts.