Hi Brian and Jeff,

I'm going to start working on this.

The small problem with the configurable approach is that considering the number of components we watch it's hard to come up with good configuration. Currently default is to follow micro, and if somebody tells me that specific component should be following minor I can set it, but I have to have that feedback... The follow micro by default could be changed too however.

If you wanted to have write access to configuration yourselves I can add you to the gitlab repo, but feel free to just ping me to do any changes.

I think we can report <<configuratble>> and <<latest>>, or even <<micro>> and <<minor>> and <<latest>>, but the reports are gonna get that much longer, making it harder to notice relevant / important upgrades.

I will see how it looks and if I can make it readable.

In any case I'm grateful for any feedback to make this more useful - thanks!



On Wed, 2023-06-28 at 11:33 -0500, Brian Stansberry wrote:
If that's doable, sure, that's ideal, although I somewhat prefer it to be <<configurable>> and <<latest>>, not <<hard coded to micro>> and latest. "Configurable" meaning as described in https://github.com/jboss-set/maven-dependency-updater#configuration. I think being able to get proposals for minors for some projects is good, even if we are not on the latest major.

If we can only have one item per GA though, for Jandex I think it should be MINOR not MICRO. Same applies if having more than 1 will take a significant time to implement.

On Wed, Jun 28, 2023 at 11:21 AM Jeff Mesnil <jmesnil@redhat.com> wrote:
Hi Brian,

IIRC, we discussed something similar with Tomas a few weeks ago and one of the suggested ideas was be to report the « micro » upgrade (as it is done now) as well as the « latest » upgrade (regardless of the major/minor/micro bump).

That would give us info on "safe" upgrades with the micro and how far we are from the head of the component.

In Jandex case, the « latest » would be 3.1.2.

What do you think?

Best regards,
Jeff


> On 28 Jun 2023, at 18:05, Brian Stansberry <brian.stansberry@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Tomas,
>
> Do you know why Jandex 3.1.x isn't on this report? Is it because this is a different minor version? If so, can we add a configuration rule[1] for io.smallrye:jandex so it proposes the MICRO stream?
>
> I'm not sure where the config that generates this email is maintained; otherwise I'd be happy to send up a PR.
>
> Hi Everyone, particularly Ladicek!
>
> Any objections to getting notifications of available minor updates of Jandex? The Jandex project is run in such a way that minor updates are likely a good fit for WF and should be suggested.
>
> [1] https://github.com/jboss-set/maven-dependency-updater#configuration
>
> Best regards,
> Brian
>
> On Fri, Jun 23, 2023 at 11:48 AM <thofman@redhat.com> wrote:
> Component Upgrade Report
> Following repositories were searched:
>     • Central https://repo1.maven.org/maven2/
>     • JBossPublic https://repository.jboss.org/nexus/content/repositories/public/
> Possible Component UpgradesGAV New Version Repository Sinceorg.bouncycastle:bcjmail-jdk18on:1.73 1.75 Central new
> 1 items
> Generated on 2023-06-23
> Report generated by Maven Dependency Updater
> _______________________________________________
> wildfly-dev mailing list -- wildfly-dev@lists.jboss.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to wildfly-dev-leave@lists.jboss.org
> %(web_page_url)slistinfo%(cgiext)s/%(_internal_name)s
>
>
> --
> Brian Stansberry
> Principal Architect, Red Hat JBoss EAP
> He/Him/His
> _______________________________________________
> wildfly-dev mailing list -- wildfly-dev@lists.jboss.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to wildfly-dev-leave@lists.jboss.org
> %(web_page_url)slistinfo%(cgiext)s/%(_internal_name)s


--
Jeff Mesnil
Engineer @ Red Hat JBoss EAP
http://jmesnil.net/



--
Brian Stansberry
Principal Architect, Red Hat JBoss EAP
He/Him/His