[hibernate-dev] Hibernate ORM version for WildFly 10.1

Gail Badner gbadner at redhat.com
Thu Aug 11 16:20:53 EDT 2016


5.0.10 and 5.1.1 needed to be delayed while we dealt with a critical bug,
HHH-10795. I am also working with John O'Hara to fix a performance
regression that was introduced into 5.0.10 and, presumably, would be in
5.1.1.

Another reason I've been holding off on releasing 5.1.1 was because of the
failures for https://github.com/wildfly/wildfly/pull/8984. It is only today
that we got a clean build.

The last couple of days I've been furiously backporting more bugfixes for
regressions and longstanding bugs. I review everything going into 5.0 and
5.1 to reduce the risk of introducing new bugs and that takes time. I have
found a couple of bugs doing this and I think this time is well spent.

I ran the tck last night and it passed. I started reviewing changes using
japi-compliance-checker and I need to finish that.

I am on track to release 5.1.1 this week.

Please be patient.

Regards,
Gail

On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 11:57 AM, Scott Marlow <smarlow at redhat.com> wrote:

> ORM 5.1, has an improvement for how we interact with CDI, that I really
> want to finish coding the WildFly side of, so I feel the *pain* of not
> having this yet.
>
> On 08/11/2016 02:04 PM, Gunnar Morling wrote:
> > Hi Scott,
> >
> >> As part of bringing ORM 5.1.1+ into WF 10.1 or 11, we need to first
> >> ensure that ORM 5.1.1 is completely *compatible* with ORM 5.0.x.
> >
> > How does this ensuring look like? Is passing the WF test suite enough,
> > or are there further criteria? If identifying changes to the API is what
> > you are after, tools such as Japicmp
> > (see https://github.com/siom79/japicmp) may help.
>
> Great tool, we are using it! :)
>
> >
> > It would be great to have some sort of formalized guideline here,
> > because otherwise there's potential for frustration on both sides. E.g.
> > Sanne and me are waiting for an update, as it will make our lives for
> > HSEARCH/OGM much easier, whereas you may feel pressurized to do some
> > update you are not 100% comfortable about). Happy about any pointers if
> > there are such rules already somewhere.
>
> I believe that the remaining analysis is to look through the git commits
> that have been merged to the ORM 5.1.x branch, that are not already
> merged to ORM 5.0.x.  I believe that only the git commits that Gail
> hasn't yet reviewed, will be checked.  I'm not sure what the count or
> complexity of those git commits are that need to be checked.  I'm not
> sure of what else that we can do, to prove that ORM 5.1.x is ready for
> WildFly 10.1/11.
>
> There are guideline documents that describe the agile development
> process that we are following.  Send me a private email if your really
> interested in reading them.
>
> >
> > That said, doing the 5.1 upgrade in WF 10.1 would seem as the sensible
> > thing to me, bringing new ORM features released quite a while ago to WF
> > community users and allowing to hone/harden them there as needed. So I
> > still haven't lost the hope that it might be happen :)
>
> We already have ORM 5.0.x as the baseline that we are hardening off of.
> I'm fine with bringing ORM 5.1 in, as long as it's equally as hardened.
>
> >
> > As a user, I'd be surprised otherwise and be wondering why I had to
> > resort to the ORM module ZIP (see
> > http://in.relation.to/2016/07/07/updating-hibernate-orm-in-wildfly/)
> > instead of WF coming with the newer version OOTB.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > --Gunnar
> >
> >
> > 2016-08-11 17:05 GMT+02:00 Scott Marlow <smarlow at redhat.com
> > <mailto:smarlow at redhat.com>>:
> >
> >
> >
> >     On 08/11/2016 10:45 AM, Sanne Grinovero wrote:
> >     > On 11 August 2016 at 15:19, Scott Marlow <smarlow at redhat.com
> <mailto:smarlow at redhat.com>> wrote:
> >     >>
> >     >> On 08/11/2016 06:19 AM, Sanne Grinovero wrote:
> >     >>>
> >     >>> I've been watching this:
> >     >>>  - https://github.com/wildfly/wildfly/pull/8984
> >     <https://github.com/wildfly/wildfly/pull/8984>
> >     >>>
> >     >>> And that's the reason I've been asking for a 5.1 release, as it
> has
> >     >>> been blocked by issues for long.
> >     >>>
> >     >>> Indeed if this wasn't being tracked for 10.1 that's sad as we
> need
> >     >>> WildFly releases with up to date versions of ORM to make better
> >     >>> progress on OGM and Search, I'm sorry if this wasn't clear but
> the PR
> >     >>> has been open for a while, as was the agreement among us that
> we'd aim
> >     >>> to have ORM 5.1 in the next WildFly version.
> >     >>
> >     >>
> >     >> The WildFly master branch is now for WildFly 11.  Could
> Search/OGM align
> >     >> with WF11 instead of 10.1, as the
> >     >> https://github.com/wildfly/wildfly/pull/8984
> >     <https://github.com/wildfly/wildfly/pull/8984> is finally passing,
> >     which is a
> >     >> good sign that ORM 5.1.1.Final will likely pass the WildFly test
> suite, and
> >     >> then get merged.
> >     >
> >     > Hi Scott,
> >     > if you could make sure that WF 10.1 had ORM 5.1.1+ that would
> greatly
> >     > help to have Search and OGM actually align.
> >     >
> >     > Since that PR is working fine (and the patch looks quite simple
> too!)
> >     > may I assume we just need to put a release together in ORM, while
> you
> >     > hold the WF train ? :)
> >     >
> >
> >     As part of bringing ORM 5.1.1+ into WF 10.1 or 11, we need to first
> >     ensure that ORM 5.1.1 is completely *compatible* with ORM 5.0.x.
> Once
> >     we know that, we should be ready for the
> >     (https://github.com/wildfly/wildfly/pull/8984
> >     <https://github.com/wildfly/wildfly/pull/8984>) merge.
> >
> >     > Thanks,
> >     > Sanne
> >     >
> >     >>
> >     >>
> >     >>>
> >     >>> I guess it wasn't clear "which" version is "next", but if we
> >     could fix
> >     >>> this for 10.1 that would be very nice, and match the decision of
> the
> >     >>> platform architects.
> >     >>>
> >     >>> Thanks,
> >     >>> Sanne
> >     >>>
> >     >>>
> >     >>> On 11 August 2016 at 10:18, Gail Badner <gbadner at redhat.com
> >     <mailto:gbadner at redhat.com>> wrote:
> >     >>>>
> >     >>>> Ah, OK. I was confusing WildFly 10.1 with 11. I'm not sure
> >     about the
> >     >>>> version for 10.1.
> >     >>>>
> >     >>>> Scott?
> >     >>>>
> >     >>>> On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 1:56 AM, Martin Simka
> >     <msimka at redhat.com <mailto:msimka at redhat.com>> wrote:
> >     >>>>
> >     >>>>> Hi Gail,
> >     >>>>>
> >     >>>>> are you sure? I'm only aware of WFLY-6930 (Upgrade Hibernate
> >     to 5.0.10)
> >     >>>>> and I'm not sure if it makes it to 10.1. Then there is
> WFLY-6854
> >     >>>>> (Upgrade
> >     >>>>> Hibernate ORM to 5.1.x) which is targeted to WildFly 11.
> >     >>>>>
> >     >>>>> https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WFLY-6930
> >     <https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WFLY-6930>
> >     >>>>> https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WFLY-6854
> >     <https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WFLY-6854>
> >     >>>>>
> >     >>>>> On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 10:42 AM, Gail Badner
> >     <gbadner at redhat.com <mailto:gbadner at redhat.com>>
> >     >>>>> wrote:
> >     >>>>>
> >     >>>>>> Hi Gunnar,
> >     >>>>>>
> >     >>>>>> 10.1 will use ORM 5.1.
> >     >>>>>>
> >     >>>>>> Regards,
> >     >>>>>> Gail
> >     >>>>>>
> >     >>>>>> On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 12:23 AM, Gunnar Morling
> >     <gunnar at hibernate.org <mailto:gunnar at hibernate.org>>
> >     >>>>>> wrote:
> >     >>>>>>
> >     >>>>>>> Hi Scott, all,
> >     >>>>>>>
> >     >>>>>>> Are there any plans to upgrade ORM in the WF 10.1 release?
> >     >>>>>>>
> >     >>>>>>> I somehow assumed that 10.1 would come with ORM 5.1, but
> >     it's still
> >     >>>>>>
> >     >>>>>> using
> >     >>>>>>>
> >     >>>>>>> 5.0.9. At least 5.0.10 would be nice if 5.1 cannot be done
> >     for some
> >     >>>>>>> reasons.
> >     >>>>>>>
> >     >>>>>>> Thanks,
> >     >>>>>>>
> >     >>>>>>> --Gunnar
> >     >>>>>>> _______________________________________________
> >     >>>>>>> hibernate-dev mailing list
> >     >>>>>>> hibernate-dev at lists.jboss.org
> >     <mailto:hibernate-dev at lists.jboss.org>
> >     >>>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
> >     <https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev>
> >     >>>>>>>
> >     >>>>>> _______________________________________________
> >     >>>>>> hibernate-dev mailing list
> >     >>>>>> hibernate-dev at lists.jboss.org
> >     <mailto:hibernate-dev at lists.jboss.org>
> >     >>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
> >     <https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev>
> >     >>>>>>
> >     >>>>>
> >     >>>>>
> >     >>>> _______________________________________________
> >     >>>> hibernate-dev mailing list
> >     >>>> hibernate-dev at lists.jboss.org
> >     <mailto:hibernate-dev at lists.jboss.org>
> >     >>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
> >     <https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev>
> >     >>>
> >     >>> _______________________________________________
> >     >>> hibernate-dev mailing list
> >     >>> hibernate-dev at lists.jboss.org <mailto:hibernate-dev at lists.
> jboss.org>
> >     >>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
> >     <https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev>
> >     >>>
> >     >>
> >     _______________________________________________
> >     hibernate-dev mailing list
> >     hibernate-dev at lists.jboss.org <mailto:hibernate-dev at lists.jboss.org>
> >     https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
> >     <https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev>
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> hibernate-dev mailing list
> hibernate-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
>


More information about the hibernate-dev mailing list