Hello Everyone, Release Model Changes ————————————————————- In order to bring new capabilities to the community quicker, we plan to move to a more iterative time-boxed approach, starting with WildFly 12 (and continuing with 13, 14, etc). By time-boxed, I mean the each release aims to have a fixed and reliable delivery window that approximates a calendar quarter. Since these time-frames are fixed, it’s important that any given feature or improvement not hold up a release. To facilitate this we need to make major changes to our development process. Currently development for any enhancement is merged in chunks, as it progresses from inception to completion. This means to have something worthy of release, we must either block for its completion or roll it back. The latter is often difficult, since at any given moment there are many features under active development, and their respective implementations can become co-dependent. Additionally, its common for component dependencies to start off as Alphas and/or Betas, and we end up needing to wait for those components to hit Final before we can cut the release. The solution to this problem is to rely more on topic branches, and only merge fully completed work to master. By fully complete, I mean all PRs on master should be fully developed, tested, and documented[1]. Additionally any updated dependencies must only be against Final/GA components. This has a number of advantages: A. Master becomes always stable, always releasable. So at any given moment we can decided to cut a release[1] B. Nightly builds become way more usable, and a great feedback channel (a release starts to have less importance) C. If a feature takes longer than expected, no big deal, it will be picked up in the next cycle[2] D. Should anything cause a major regression, not caught in testing it will be easier to revert, since the history will be cleaner Since in-progress work will need to be based on topic branches, custom jobs on ci.wildfly.org will need to be relied upon instead of the automated CI that happens when you submit a PR (although that’s still important and still staying). Additionally if two changes/improvements are interrelated, then they will need to either share a topic branch, or find a way to construct the work independently (potentially adding and removing a temporary construct until both are merged). [1] To make it easier to associate documentation with the PR, we are looking to move to an asciidoc based solution instead of confluence like we utilize today. [2] While this is generally the case, there are some activities we can’t avoid before releasing, such as ensuring a TCK run has completed. [3] An important aspect of C is that iterations have a short enough cycle, such that the pressure to make a particular iteration is low enough to avoid the urge to try and cram something in, and potentially compromise quality (e.g. no docs etc). Java EE8 ———————— As part of adopting this model, we aim to deliver Java EE8 in incremental chunks. Adding support for specs individually in batches. As an example for WildFly 12, I propose we target Servlet 4, JSON-B, and CDI. Due to unfortunate restrictions in EE certification, we will need to have a separate configuration profile or property to enable these additional APIs until we complete full EE8 certification. Proposed WildFly 12 Goals [Target Release Date = Feb 28, 2018] ———————————————————————— + Adopt new release model + Java 9 improvements + Servlet 4 + JSON-B (incorporating Yasoon) + CDI 2 + JSF 2.3 + Metaspace usage improvements + early/initial changes to accommodate the new provisioning effort (easy slimming, updates, etc) Proposed WildFly 13 Goals (Very Tentative) [May 2018] ———————————————————————————- + New EE Security Spec + Adoption of provisioning + JPA 2.2 + JAX-RS 2.1 + BV 2.0 + Agroal inclusion Just to highlight that with this new model, that these goals I am proposing are not something we would block on, any given item might be deferred to the next release if it’s not quite ready. Let me know if you have any additional major items you are planning to contribute towards 12. Thanks! -Jason _______________________________________________ wildfly-dev mailing list wildfly-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/wildfly-dev

Hi Jason, +1 for the plan to do time-boxed releases with a three month cadence. Maybe you could break down the schedule of a given release iteration a bit further, so e.g. if WF 12 is scheduled for February 28th, what are the mile stone dates for delivering PRs with new developments in WF itself, component upgrades, bugfixes etc.? Having a schedule like for instance OpenJDK has [1] would be helpful, so everyone knows what needs to be done by when. Speaking about BV 2.0 and HV 6, we're ready to deliver this (in last week's Hibernate team meeting we agreed on sending a PR for updating WF this week). We've done a couple of 6.0.x releases (at 6.0.6 atm.), i.e. it has been honed nicely and also performance has been improved significantly [2]. So I'd hope we can included this in 12 already? Thanks, --Gunnar [1] http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk/10/ [2] http://in.relation.to/2017/10/31/bean-validation-benchmark-revisited/ 2017-12-14 3:51 GMT+01:00 Jason Greene <jason.greene(a)redhat.com&gt;: > > Hello Everyone, > > Release Model Changes > ————————————————————- > In order to bring new capabilities to the community quicker, we plan to > move to a more iterative time-boxed approach, starting with WildFly 12 (and > continuing with 13, 14, etc). By time-boxed, I mean the each release aims > to have a fixed and reliable delivery window that approximates a calendar > quarter. Since these time-frames are fixed, it’s important that any given > feature or improvement not hold up a release. To facilitate this we need to > make major changes to our development process. Currently development for > any enhancement is merged in chunks, as it progresses from inception to > completion. This means to have something worthy of release, we must either > block for its completion or roll it back. The latter is often difficult, > since at any given moment there are many features under active development, > and their respective implementations can become co-dependent. Additionally, > its common for component dependencies to start off as Alphas and/or Betas, > and we end up needing to wait for those components to hit Final before we > can cut the release. > > The solution to this problem is to rely more on topic branches, and only > merge fully completed work to master. By fully complete, I mean all PRs on > master should be fully developed, tested, and documented[1]. Additionally > any updated dependencies must only be against Final/GA components. > > This has a number of advantages: > > A. Master becomes always stable, always releasable. So at any given > moment we can decided to cut a release[1] > B. Nightly builds become way more usable, and a great feedback channel (a > release starts to have less importance) > C. If a feature takes longer than expected, no big deal, it will be > picked up in the next cycle[2] > D. Should anything cause a major regression, not caught in testing it > will be easier to revert, since the history will be cleaner > > Since in-progress work will need to be based on topic branches, custom > jobs on ci.wildfly.org will need to be relied upon instead of the > automated CI that happens when you submit a PR (although that’s still > important and still staying). Additionally if two changes/improvements are > interrelated, then they will need to either share a topic branch, or find a > way to construct the work independently (potentially adding and removing a > temporary construct until both are merged). > > > [1] To make it easier to associate documentation with the PR, we are > looking to move to an asciidoc based solution instead of confluence like we > utilize today. > > [2] While this is generally the case, there are some activities we can’t > avoid before releasing, such as ensuring a TCK run has completed. > > [3] An important aspect of C is that iterations have a short enough > cycle, such that the pressure to make a particular iteration is low enough > to avoid the urge to try and cram something in, and potentially compromise > quality (e.g. no docs etc). > > > Java EE8 > ———————— > As part of adopting this model, we aim to deliver Java EE8 in incremental > chunks. Adding support for specs individually in batches. As an example for > WildFly 12, I propose we target Servlet 4, JSON-B, and CDI. Due to > unfortunate restrictions in EE certification, we will need to have a > separate configuration profile or property to enable these additional APIs > until we complete full EE8 certification. > > Proposed WildFly 12 Goals [Target Release Date = Feb 28, 2018] > ———————————————————————— > + Adopt new release model > + Java 9 improvements > + Servlet 4 > + JSON-B (incorporating Yasoon) > + CDI 2 > + JSF 2.3 > + Metaspace usage improvements > + early/initial changes to accommodate the new provisioning effort (easy > slimming, updates, etc) > > Proposed WildFly 13 Goals (Very Tentative) [May 2018] > ———————————————————————————- > + New EE Security Spec > + Adoption of provisioning > + JPA 2.2 > + JAX-RS 2.1 > + BV 2.0 > + Agroal inclusion > > Just to highlight that with this new model, that these goals I am > proposing are not something we would block on, any given item might be > deferred to the next release if it’s not quite ready. Let me know if you > have any additional major items you are planning to contribute towards 12. > > Thanks! > > -Jason > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > wildfly-dev mailing list > wildfly-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/wildfly-dev _______________________________________________ wildfly-dev mailing list wildfly-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/wildfly-dev

> On Dec 13, 2017, at 11:32 PM, Jaikiran Pai <jai.forums2013(a)gmail.com > <mailto:jai.forums2013@gmail.com>> wrote: > > Hi Jason, > > Looks good in terms of quicker releases. > > A related question, given this proposal, would it mean there will never > be Alpha, Beta, CR of WildFly releases anymore? So with the master branch becoming always stable, and with the short windows I think Alphas and Betas are largely superseded by the nightly builds (effectively there is a release every night!). However if there is a strong desire for a Beta or a CR we could cut one. The overhead is small seeing as you can just take any commit from master.