[hibernate-dev] replace Pax Exam with Docker

Fri Jan 12 13:10:10 EST 2018

On 12 January 2018 at 18:04, Steve Ebersole <steve at hibernate.org> wrote:
> I do not.  But from what I understand its trivial to install on Fedora,
> unlike some other tools y'all like to use ;)

Right, this one is easy to install :)

Although my questions was more about if you're all ok with that. I
know personally I've been skeptical: I don't like having barriers for
contributors, nor have any "required" service running, however I've
given up on fighting Docker, and also it's best to require just Docker
and then via Docker we can have all other goodies which would
otherwise be hard to install.

>
>
> On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 11:55 AM Sanne Grinovero <sanne at hibernate.org>
> wrote:
>>
>> On 12 January 2018 at 17:32, Brett Meyer <brett at hibernate.org> wrote:
>> > If I don't have time to contribute to Pax Exam, I certainly don't have
>> > time to start a new project haha...
>> >
>> > And realistically, that "something new" would likely involve containers
>> > anyway.
>> >
>> > At this point, mostly a question of 1) status quo, 2) Docker (or any
>> > other container-based solution), or 3) try screwing around with Pax Exam
>> > in "server-only" mode (but I don't have high hopes there).
>>
>> Sure. Docker is now available on the CI slaves too, so that's not a
>> problem.
>>
>> The only annoyance is that the whole ORM team - and anyone
>> contributing - would need to have Docker as well, but that doesn't
>> seem too bad to me... and was likely bound to happen for other tools
>> :)
>>
>> Steve, Chris and Andrea? Ok with that? Maybe you have Docker running
>> already?
>>
>> >
>> >
>> > On 1/12/18 12:27 PM, Sanne Grinovero wrote:
>> >> Ok, looks like you really should start something new :)
>> >>
>> >> Hopefully many of those other annoyed Karaf developers will follow.
>> >>
>> >> On 12 January 2018 at 13:59, Brett Meyer <brett at hibernate.org> wrote:
>> >>> Plus, for me, it's more a question of time.  I only have a bit
>> >>> available
>> >>> for open source work these days, and I'd rather spend that knocking
>> >>> out
>> >>> some of the hibernate-osgi tasks we've had on our plate for a while.
>> >>> I
>> >>> unfortunately don't have anything left to contribute to Pax Exam
>> >>> itself,
>> >>> assuming that would even fix the problem.
>> >>>
>> >>> Even worse, we're barely using the integration tests for anything more
>> >>> than a simple smoke test at this point, since it seems like every time
>> >>> we touch it something new goes wrong.  Looking for a more *consistent*
>> >>> solution -- need more confidence in the backbone.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> On 1/12/18 8:56 AM, Brett Meyer wrote:
>> >>>> Sorry Gunnar/Sanne, should have clarified this first:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> We actually used Arquillian before Pax Exam, and the experience was
>> >>>> far worse (somewhat of a long story)...
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> Pax Exam was just "helping" to deploy/run things in Karaf, so I
>> >>>> can't imagine using Karaf without the helpers being a walk in the
>> >>>> park
>> >>>>
>> >>>> That's not actually the case.  The way Pax Exam currently runs our
>> >>>> tests is fundamentally part of the problem.  The test code is
>> >>>> dynamically wrapped in an actual bundle, using something like
>> >>>> tiny-bundles, and executed *within* the container itself. Pax
>> >>>> overrides runs with additional probes, overrides logging
>> >>>> infrastructure, etc.  Those nuances can often be the source of many
>> >>>> of
>> >>>> the bugs (there are a ton of classloader implications, etc. -- IIRC,
>> >>>> this was one area where Arquillian was much, much worse).  There are
>> >>>> some benefits to that setup, but for Hibernate it mainly gets in the
>> >>>> way.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> It *does* have a "server mode" where tests run outside of the
>> >>>> container, but I vaguely remember going down that path early on and
>> >>>> hitting a roadblock.  For the life of me, I can't remember the
>> >>>> specifics.  But my pushback here is that ultimately Docker might be
>> >>>> more preferable, giving us more of a real world scenario to do true
>> >>>> e2e tests without something else in the middle.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> so I can't imagine using Karaf without the helpers being a walk in
>> >>>> the park; e.g. having to deal with HTTP operations comes with its own
>> >>>> baggage {dependencies, complexity, speed, .. } and generally more
>> >>>> stuff to maintain.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> I guess I respectfully disagree with that, but purely due to Karaf
>> >>>> features.  Our features.xml does most of the heavy lifting for us
>> >>>> w/r/t getting Hibernate provisioned.  The same would be true with the
>> >>>> test harness bundle/feature.  REST is simple and out-of-the-box
>> >>>> thanks
>> >>>> to Karaf + CXF or Camel.  For other possible routes (Karaf commands),
>> >>>> we already have code available in our demo/quickstart projects.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> Also: considered contributing to Pax?
>> >>>> Yes, of course.  But the fact that numerous Karaf *committers*
>> >>>> themselves have a long history of built-up frustration on it doesn't
>> >>>> leave me optimistic.  A couple of them had tried to pitch in at one
>> >>>> point and weren't able to get anywhere.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> but it seems their developers really expect their users to be deeply
>> >>>> familiar with it all
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Absolutely!  But again, our struggles also come down to the
>> >>>> fundamental way Pax Exam works...
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On 1/12/18 6:27 AM, Sanne Grinovero wrote:
>> >>>>> +1 to explore alternatives to Pax Exam, but I'd be wary of
>> >>>>> maintining
>> >>>>> our own test infrastructure.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Pax Exam was just "helping" to deploy/run things in Karaf, so I
>> >>>>> can't
>> >>>>> imagine using Karaf without the helpers being a walk in the park;
>> >>>>> e.g.
>> >>>>> having to deal with HTTP operations comes with its own baggage
>> >>>>> {dependencies, complexity, speed, .. } and generally more stuff to
>> >>>>> maintain.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> So.. +1 to try out Arquillian or anything else. Or maybe you could
>> >>>>> start your own tool, but I'd prefer to see it in a separate
>> >>>>> repository
>> >>>>> :) e.g. a nice Gradle plugin so maybe you get more people helping?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Also: considered contributing to Pax? My personal experience with it
>> >>>>> has always been a pain but if I had to try identify the reason, it
>> >>>>> was
>> >>>>> mostly caused by me being unfamiliar with Karaf and not having good
>> >>>>> clues to track down the real failure; maybe some minor error
>> >>>>> reporting
>> >>>>> improvements could make a big difference to its usability? Just
>> >>>>> saying, I don't feel like Pax is bad, but it seems their developers
>> >>>>> really expect their users to be deeply familiar with it all - feels
>> >>>>> like the typical case in which they could use some feedback and a
>> >>>>> hand.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Thanks,
>> >>>>> Sanne
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> On 12 January 2018 at 08:22, Gunnar Morling<gunnar at hibernate.org>
>> >>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>> Hi Brett,
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> We also had our fair share of frustration with Pax Exam in HV, and
>> >>>>>> I was
>> >>>>>> (more than once) at the point of dropping it.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Docker could work, but as you say it's a bit of a heavy dependency,
>> >>>>>> if not
>> >>>>>> required anyways. Not sure whether I'd like to add this as a
>> >>>>>> prerequisite
>> >>>>>> for the HV build to be executed. And tests in separate profiles
>> >>>>>> tend to be
>> >>>>>> "forgotten" in my experience.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> One other approach could be to use Arquillian's OSGi support (see
>> >>>>>> https://github.com/arquillian/arquillian-container-osgi), did you
>> >>>>>> consider
>> >>>>>> to use that one as an alternative?
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Cheers,
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> --Gunnar
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> 2018-01-12 3:34 GMT+01:00 Brett Meyer<brett at hibernate.org>:
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> <tired-rant>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> I'm fed up with Pax Exam and would love to replace it as the
>> >>>>>>> hibernate-osgi integration test harness.  Most of the Karaf
>> >>>>>>> committers
>> >>>>>>> I've been working with hate it more than I do.  Every single time
>> >>>>>>> we
>> >>>>>>> upgrade the Karaf version, something less-than-minor in
>> >>>>>>> hibernate-osgi,
>> >>>>>>> upgrade/change dependencies, or attempt to upgrade Pax Exam
>> >>>>>>> itself,
>> >>>>>>> there's some new obfuscated failure.  And no matter how much I
>> >>>>>>> pray, it
>> >>>>>>> refuses to let us get to the container logs to figure out what
>> >>>>>>> happened.  Tis a house of cards.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> </tired-rant>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> One alternative that recently came up elsewhere: use Docker to
>> >>>>>>> bootstrap
>> >>>>>>> the container, hit it with our features.xml, install a test bundle
>> >>>>>>> that
>> >>>>>>> exposes functionality externally (over HTTP, Karaf commands, etc),
>> >>>>>>> then
>> >>>>>>> hit the endpoints and run assertions.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Pros: true "integration test", plain vanilla Karaf, direct access
>> >>>>>>> to all
>> >>>>>>> logs, easier to eventually support and test other containers.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Cons: Need Docker installed for local test runs, probably safer to
>> >>>>>>> isolate the integration test behind a disabled-by-default Maven
>> >>>>>>> profile.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Any gut reactions?
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> OSGi is fun and I'm not at all bitter,
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> -Brett-
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> ;)
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>> >>>>>>> hibernate-dev mailing list
>> >>>>>>> hibernate-dev at lists.jboss.org
>> >>>>>>> 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
>> >>>>> _______________________________________________
>> >>>>> hibernate-dev mailing list
>> >>>>> hibernate-dev at lists.jboss.org
>> >>>>> 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
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > hibernate-dev mailing list
>> > hibernate-dev at lists.jboss.org
>> > 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