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

An update on current status: With some more tempering in weld core, I am able to get a build of Weld on JDK 8 and 11 (see Travis build on that PR). Latest PR that allows it is here - https://github.com/weld/core/pull/1981 I've tested (JDK 8) snapshotted versions of Weld, Arq and Arq-weld-container and basically any tests not requiring EE container were passing. Since I'll be leaving earlier today, I plan on starting the core release on Mon. I still expect some minor issues with release plugin (since we can only release a subset compared to what we normally do), but that should be solvable. After that I plan on spending some time playing with CI setup to tweak it for as much testing as we can do with weld 4 and without EE server so that for Alpha2 we already have a solid automated test base (once again). Regards and have a nice weekend 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: Monday, April 20, 2020 5:56:19 PM > Subject: Re: [weld-dev] [cdi-dev] How would I go about getting a snapshot build of Weld out? > > Ok, looking at comments. Yes, I would think we have to break the > circularity with a weld release first so arq can be put out. > > On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 10:06 AM Matej Novotny <manovotn(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > > > Delved into this a bit more. > > I've added several comments to relevant issues and filed some more PRs > > myself. > > > > I've also released Weld API 4.0.Alpha1 just now, so we can upgrade that in > > the core PR and Arq. Weld container PR. > > > > I am not quite sure how to handle that Weld <-> Arq. Weld container > > dependency. Apparently, they both need each other. > > I suppose we will have to get out Weld build that just skips tests for the > > first Alpha so that we can upgrade it there? > > Similar situation happens with CDI TCK, we cannot test them since we need > > GF to have Weld version first... chickens and eggs everywhere :) > > > > Matej > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Matej Novotny" <manovotn(a)redhat.com&gt; > > > To: "Scott Stark" <sstark(a)redhat.com&gt; > > > Cc: "weld-dev" <weld-dev(a)lists.jboss.org&gt; > > > Sent: Friday, April 17, 2020 5:04:31 PM > > > Subject: Re: [weld-dev] [cdi-dev] How would I go about getting a > > snapshot build of Weld out? > > > > > > Awesome, thanks a lot! > > > I'll soon be going off for the weekend, so on Mon I can pick that up and > > try > > > to put it all together locally and see what's the issue. > > > > > > 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: Friday, April 17, 2020 4:38:16 PM > > > > Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] How would I go about getting a snapshot build of > > > > Weld out? > > > > > > > > I just replaced the previous PR with one that targets master. I seemed > > to > > > > need to update quite a few more things or somehow did not notice their > > > > impact when being based off the 3.0 branch. It is relying on snapshot > > > > builds of weld-api, arquillian-core, and arquillian-weld-embedded. I > > > > believe I have all of this documented in the root JakartaEE9.adoc. > > > > > > > > The current failures look like that the weld-se test classpath is not > > > > including the weld-spi classes, but I have not had time to look into > > the > > > > details. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 9:28 AM Matej Novotny <manovotn(a)redhat.com > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hmm, I am not sure I am on that list, even though I am pretty sure I > > > > > applied earlier. Will try again. > > > > > > > > > > ----- 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 3:32:07 PM > > > > > > Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] How would I go about getting a snapshot > > build of > > > > > Weld out? > > > > > > > > > > > > Ok, I'll look at the comments. > > > > > > > > > > > > There is someone on the jakartaee redhat list who can do the Arq > > > > > > release. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 8:29 AM Matej Novotny < manovotn(a)redhat.com > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > weld-dev mailing list > > > weld-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/weld-dev > > > > > > > >