Re: [weld-dev] [cdi-dev] How would I go about getting a snapshot build of Weld out?

I've added comments to both PRs. Meanwhile, on weld core and api I created 3.1 branches so master can move on to 4.x snapshots. Weld JIRA now also holds a version for 4.0.0.Alpha1 the date being tentative based on other releases we need to do. I also plan to look into CI and other setups that will be needed to have some testing enabled (currently with pack. changes all PRs will inevitably fail since they run against WFLY). We also need to find someone who has the power to release Arq and align the release with them. I can see us going for (1) Arq. core release, then (2)weld-arq. container and then (3) weld api and core. Matej ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Scott Stark" <sstark(a)redhat.com&gt; > To: "Matej Novotny" <manovotn(a)redhat.com&gt; > Cc: "weld-dev" <weld-dev(a)lists.jboss.org&gt; > Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2020 2:34:02 AM > Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] How would I go about getting a snapshot build of Weld out? > > I have a fork of the arq core that I have created a PR from to add Jakarta > EE 9 based testenrichers: > https://github.com/arquillian/arquillian-core/pull/238 > > The updated weld 4.0 branch PR has just been created as well: > https://github.com/weld/core/pull/1979 > > On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 7:11 PM Matej Novotny <manovotn(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > > > Hmm, arq. test enricher has some ancient dependencies. In fact, they rely > > on CDI 1.0 (and therefore Weld 1.x). Looking closely at the code, it looks > > like Weld dependency is only needed for tests, for actual impl, CDI will > > do. > > And the test can be re-written to avoid using Weld internal completely > > assuming we are on CDI 2.0+, here is how - > > https://github.com/arquillian/arquillian-core/pull/239. With this change > > you only need to pass in CDI SE impl as test dependency and it will work > > (still means you need one release for another though, so one has to release > > without tests passing). > > However, the actual issue in Arq. is that it now looks for now outdated > > annotation[1]. > > Which I presume is something you have fixed locally? I did check your > > repos but couldn't find fork of Arq. core. I can fix that as well if you > > don't have it already. > > > > I've also checked other repos: > > * The core PR[2] you closed was built from Weld's 3.0 branch which is > > wrong, we need that against current master to be up to date > > - on the PR you said you have something else already, can you push it > > please? If you don't have it, I can do that as well; I just don't want to > > duplicate work > > * API PR[3] misses one commit from current master, otherwise it's good > > > > Regards > > Matej > > > > > > ______________________________________________________________________________________________ > > [1] > > https://github.com/arquillian/arquillian-core/blob/master/testenrichers/c... > > [2] https://github.com/weld/core/pull/1956 > > [3] https://github.com/weld/api/pull/91 > > > > > > >