7:11 p.m.
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 is that it now looks for now outdated annotation[1].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
----- Original Message -----
From: "Scott Stark" <sstark(a)redhat.com>
To: "Matej Novotny" <manovotn(a)redhat.com>
Cc: "cdi-dev" <cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>, "weld-dev"
<weld-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2020 8:44:37 PM
Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] How would I go about getting a snapshot build of Weld out?
So I have gotten all of the Weld test passing after creating updates to the
arquillian-core and arquillian-weld-embedded projects. We will need a
release of the arquillian-core which in turn needs a release of
weld-core-impl, so a bit of circularity there due to the testenricher-cdi
dependency.
*[**INFO**] *
*------------------------------------------------------------------------*
*[**INFO**] **Reactor Summary for Weld Parent 4.0.0-SNAPSHOT:*
*[**INFO**] *
*[**INFO**] Weld Parent ........................................ **SUCCESS**
[ 1.804 s]*
*[**INFO**] Weld Implementation (Core) ......................... **SUCCESS**
[ 4.674 s]*
*[**INFO**] Weld EJB ........................................... **SUCCESS**
[ 0.421 s]*
*[**INFO**] Weld JSF ........................................... **SUCCESS**
[ 0.969 s]*
*[**INFO**] Weld JTA ........................................... **SUCCESS**
[ 0.244 s]*
*[**INFO**] Weld Web ........................................... **SUCCESS**
[ 0.889 s]*
*[**INFO**] Weld Probe Parent .................................. **SUCCESS**
[ 0.119 s]*
*[**INFO**] Weld Probe Core .................................... **SUCCESS**
[ 2.204 s]*
*[**INFO**] Weld Test Utilities ................................ **SUCCESS**
[ 0.320 s]*
*[**INFO**] weld-probe-tests ................................... **SUCCESS**
[ 0.989 s]*
*[**INFO**] Weld Core BOM ...................................... **SUCCESS**
[ 0.023 s]*
*[**INFO**] Weld Unit Tests .................................... **SUCCESS**
[ 3.693 s]*
*[**INFO**] AtInject TCK runner for Weld ....................... **SUCCESS**
[ 1.721 s]*
*[**INFO**] Weld Environment Common ............................ **SUCCESS**
[ 0.930 s]*
*[**INFO**] Weld SE Parent ..................................... **SUCCESS**
[ 0.110 s]*
*[**INFO**] Weld SE (Core) ..................................... **SUCCESS**
[ 12.869 s]*
*[**INFO**] Weld SE (Uber Jar) ................................. **SUCCESS**
[ 0.712 s]*
*[**INFO**] Weld SE Tests ...................................... **SUCCESS**
[01:15 min]*
*[**INFO**] *
*------------------------------------------------------------------------*
*[**INFO**] **BUILD SUCCESS*
*[**INFO**] *
*------------------------------------------------------------------------*
*[**INFO**] Total time: 01:48 min*
*[**INFO**] Finished at: 2020-04-15T13:26:42-05:00*
*[**INFO**] *
*------------------------------------------------------------------------*
On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 9:25 AM Scott Stark <sstark(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> Ok thanks, I'll replace the current PR as I started over and have been
> trying to fix some of the current arquillian and weld test failures.
>
> The GF team uses the glassfish-dev(a)eclipse.org mailing list for their
> communications.
>
> On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 4:41 AM Matej Novotny <manovotn(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Scott,
>>
>> this question is a better fit for weld-dev mailing list, so adding that
>> to Cc.
>>
>> I was about to start a conversation on something similar as this has been
>> on my TODO list for some time.
>> I am after information on how to get in touch with GF team - about how
>> they execute TCKs (namely CDI ofc) and how to replace various weld
>> versions
>> inside it so that we can verify things work. Do you happen to know what
>> channels we can use to coordinate there?
>>
>> As for Weld, I will be creating 3.x branch to host current version as
>> that will linger for some time. Then I can look into your PRs and get
>> master to 4.x.
>> We do not have a CI setup to publish snapshots, but I can do Alpha/Beta
>> releases as needed. We should get it into somewhat stable state before we
>> do that though, a release that doesn't even know if it's tests work is
not
>> very useful.
>> Therefore, I think we should start with those test failures and possibly
>> arq container fix.
>> However, I do not know how to release arq container; looks like Bartosz
>> did the last release, so he might know once we find out what's wrong
>> there.
>>
>> Later this week or early next week I should be able to pay full attention
>> to this and help you with it.
>>
>> Regards
>> Matej
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> > From: "Scott Stark" <sstark(a)redhat.com>
>> > To: "cdi-dev" <cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
>> > Sent: Friday, April 10, 2020 8:10:53 PM
>> > Subject: [cdi-dev] How would I go about getting a snapshot build of
>> Weld out?
>> >
>> > Other Jakarta projects are in need of a Jakarta EE 9 based weld
>> > implementation to even compile some aspects of their project it seems.
>> Both
>> > Glassfish and Batch have asked about it. We also need it to fully test
>> > Hibernate Validator.
>> >
>> > I have done another round of updates to new Jakarta EE 9 api releases
>> and
>> > updated additional API uses. There are still issues with errors in core
>> and
>> > SE tests due to problems with the arquillian weld container that I'll
>> start
>> > looking into, but I would like to get a snapshot build out. Is there a
>> CI
>> > environment I can use for that?
>> >
>> > Current info on the changes and how to build the snapshot:
>> > https://github.com/starksm64/core/blob/4.0/JakartaEE9.adoc
>> >
>> > [INFO]
>> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >
>> > [INFO] Reactor Summary for Weld Parent 4.0.0-SNAPSHOT:
>> >
>> > [INFO]
>> >
>> > [INFO] Weld Parent ........................................ SUCCESS [
>> 1.636
>> > s]
>> >
>> > [INFO] Weld Implementation (Core) ......................... SUCCESS [
>> 3.756
>> > s]
>> >
>> > [INFO] Weld EJB ........................................... SUCCESS [
>> 0.287
>> > s]
>> >
>> > [INFO] Weld JSF ........................................... SUCCESS [
>> 0.978
>> > s]
>> >
>> > [INFO] Weld JTA ........................................... SUCCESS [
>> 0.182
>> > s]
>> >
>> > [INFO] Weld Web ........................................... SUCCESS [
>> 0.906
>> > s]
>> >
>> > [INFO] Weld Probe Parent .................................. SUCCESS [
>> 0.107
>> > s]
>> >
>> > [INFO] Weld Probe Core .................................... SUCCESS [
>> 2.104
>> > s]
>> >
>> > [INFO] Weld Test Utilities ................................ SUCCESS [
>> 0.254
>> > s]
>> >
>> > [INFO] weld-probe-tests ................................... SUCCESS [
>> 1.091
>> > s]
>> >
>> > [INFO] Weld Core BOM ...................................... SUCCESS [
>> 0.001
>> > s]
>> >
>> > [INFO] Weld Unit Tests .................................... SUCCESS [
>> 3.268
>> > s]
>> >
>> > [INFO] AtInject TCK runner for Weld ....................... SUCCESS [
>> 1.596
>> > s]
>> >
>> > [INFO] Weld Environment Common ............................ SUCCESS [
>> 0.912
>> > s]
>> >
>> > [INFO] Weld SE Parent ..................................... SUCCESS [
>> 0.101
>> > s]
>> >
>> > [INFO] Weld SE (Core) ..................................... FAILURE [
>> 7.875
>> > s]
>> >
>> > [INFO] Weld SE (Uber Jar) ................................. SUCCESS [
>> 0.165
>> > s]
>> >
>> > [INFO] Weld SE Tests ...................................... FAILURE [
>> 1.070
>> > s]
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > cdi-dev mailing list
>> > cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev
>> >
>> > Note that for all code provided on this list, the provider licenses the
>> code
>> > under the Apache License, Version 2
>> > (http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html). For all other ideas
>> > provided on this list, the provider waives all patent and other
>> intellectual
>> > property rights inherent in such information.
>>
>>
7:34 p.m.
New subject: [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> 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
8:28 a.m.
New subject: [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>
To: "Matej Novotny" <manovotn(a)redhat.com>
Cc: "weld-dev" <weld-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
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> 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
>
>
>
8:32 a.m.
New subject: [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>
> To: "Matej Novotny" <manovotn(a)redhat.com>
> Cc: "weld-dev" <weld-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
> 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>
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
> >
> >
> >
>
9:28 a.m.
New subject: [cdi-dev] How would I go about getting a snapshot build of Weld out?
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>
To: "Matej Novotny" <manovotn(a)redhat.com>
Cc: "weld-dev" <weld-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
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>
> > To: "Matej Novotny" <manovotn(a)redhat.com>
> > Cc: "weld-dev" <weld-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
> > 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>
> 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
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
9:38 a.m.
New subject: [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>
> To: "Matej Novotny" <manovotn(a)redhat.com>
> Cc: "weld-dev" <weld-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
> 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>
> > > To: "Matej Novotny" <manovotn(a)redhat.com>
> > > Cc: "weld-dev" <weld-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
> > > 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>
> > 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
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
10:04 a.m.
New subject: [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>
To: "Matej Novotny" <manovotn(a)redhat.com>
Cc: "weld-dev" <weld-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
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>
> > To: "Matej Novotny" <manovotn(a)redhat.com>
> > Cc: "weld-dev" <weld-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
> > 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>
> > > > To: "Matej Novotny" <manovotn(a)redhat.com>
> > > > Cc: "weld-dev" <weld-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
> > > > 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>
> > > 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
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
10:06 a.m.
New subject: [cdi-dev] How would I go about getting a snapshot build of Weld out?
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>
To: "Scott Stark" <sstark(a)redhat.com>
Cc: "weld-dev" <weld-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
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>
> To: "Matej Novotny" <manovotn(a)redhat.com>
> Cc: "weld-dev" <weld-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
> 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>
> > > To: "Matej Novotny" <manovotn(a)redhat.com>
> > > Cc: "weld-dev" <weld-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
> > > 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>
> > > > > To: "Matej Novotny" <manovotn(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > Cc: "weld-dev" <weld-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
> > > > > 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>
> > > > 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
10:56 a.m.
New subject: [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> 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>
> To: "Scott Stark" <sstark(a)redhat.com>
> Cc: "weld-dev" <weld-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
> 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>
> > To: "Matej Novotny" <manovotn(a)redhat.com>
> > Cc: "weld-dev" <weld-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
> > 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>
> > > > To: "Matej Novotny" <manovotn(a)redhat.com>
> > > > Cc: "weld-dev" <weld-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
> > > > 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>
> > > > > > To: "Matej Novotny" <manovotn(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > > Cc: "weld-dev" <weld-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
> > > > > > 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>
> > > > > 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
>
6:36 a.m.
New subject: [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>
To: "Matej Novotny" <manovotn(a)redhat.com>
Cc: "weld-dev" <weld-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
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> 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>
> > To: "Scott Stark" <sstark(a)redhat.com>
> > Cc: "weld-dev" <weld-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
> > 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>
> > > To: "Matej Novotny" <manovotn(a)redhat.com>
> > > Cc: "weld-dev" <weld-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
> > > 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>
> > > > > To: "Matej Novotny" <manovotn(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > Cc: "weld-dev" <weld-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
> > > > > 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>
> > > > > > > To: "Matej Novotny"
<manovotn(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > > > Cc: "weld-dev"
<weld-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
> > > > > > > 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>
> > > > > > 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
> >
>
>
10:03 a.m.
New subject: [cdi-dev] How would I go about getting a snapshot build of Weld out?
Great, thanks for the update. I'll create an issue for the jboss-logging
annotation issue and look into creating a PR for it.
On Fri, Apr 24, 2020 at 6:36 AM Matej Novotny <manovotn(a)redhat.com> wrote:
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>
> To: "Matej Novotny" <manovotn(a)redhat.com>
> Cc: "weld-dev" <weld-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
> 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>
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>
> > > To: "Scott Stark" <sstark(a)redhat.com>
> > > Cc: "weld-dev" <weld-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
> > > 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>
> > > > To: "Matej Novotny" <manovotn(a)redhat.com>
> > > > Cc: "weld-dev" <weld-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
> > > > 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>
> > > > > > To: "Matej Novotny" <manovotn(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > > Cc: "weld-dev" <weld-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
> > > > > > 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>
> > > > > > > > To: "Matej Novotny"
<manovotn(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > > > > Cc: "weld-dev"
<weld-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
> > > > > > > > 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>
> > > > > > > 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
> > >
> >
> >
>
2:52 p.m.
New subject: [cdi-dev] How would I go about getting a snapshot build of Weld out?
Ok, I see you have already fixed the logging issue in the
https://github.com/weld/core/pull/1981 PR, but it has not been merged.
On Fri, Apr 24, 2020 at 10:03 AM Scott Stark <sstark(a)redhat.com> wrote:
Great, thanks for the update. I'll create an issue for the
jboss-logging
annotation issue and look into creating a PR for it.
On Fri, Apr 24, 2020 at 6:36 AM Matej Novotny <manovotn(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> 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>
> > To: "Matej Novotny" <manovotn(a)redhat.com>
> > Cc: "weld-dev" <weld-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
> > 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>
> 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>
> > > > To: "Scott Stark" <sstark(a)redhat.com>
> > > > Cc: "weld-dev" <weld-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
> > > > 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>
> > > > > To: "Matej Novotny" <manovotn(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > Cc: "weld-dev" <weld-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
> > > > > 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>
> > > > > > > To: "Matej Novotny"
<manovotn(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > > > Cc: "weld-dev"
<weld-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
> > > > > > > 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>
> > > > > > > > > To: "Matej Novotny"
<manovotn(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > > > > > Cc: "weld-dev"
<weld-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
> > > > > > > > > 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>
> > > > > > > > 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
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
1703
days inactive
1711
days old
11 comments
2 participants
participants (2)
-
Matej Novotny -
Scott Stark