[resteasy-dev] RESTEasy and possible "community" contribution

Wed May 4 12:20:30 EDT 2016

--
Weinan Li / JBoss

> On May 5, 2016, at 12:11 AM, Rostislav Svoboda <rsvoboda at redhat.com> wrote:
> 
>>> Moving the discussion to the mailing list ++ adding few notes about the
>>> project structure and TS.
>>> 
>>> Structure:
>>> - why is there one module jaxrs in the root of repo -
>>> https://github.com/resteasy/Resteasy ?
>> 
>> It's added by Bill but I forget the reason. I don't like it either :-) We can
>> remove it now as JAX-RS is moved outside RESTEasy repo.
>> 
>>> - there are too many modules (in root jaxrs module) from my perspective
>>>  -- multi module project structure can affect build time
>>>  -- find . | grep pom.xml | wc -l reports 226 pom.xml files
>> The 'example' module contains all the Bill's book examples. We need to ask
>> him for permission to move these away.
> 
> I think it can't cause any harm if it's just moved to separate repo under https://github.com/resteasy
I checked his book and the preface has this: "Supplemental...is available for download at https://github.com/oreillymedia/restful_java_jax-rs_2_0"

So I guess we can move it away.

> 
> Maybe a bit rude question - do we really need to ask Bill about everything ?
We don't have to and we didn't ask Bill for everything :-) But for the things that may affect the issues out of the code repo itself, we may need to ask him.

Now as the change won't affect his book, I guess we are safe to move it.

For TJWS feature, some classes are in 'resteasy-jaxrs' module, which already become a core component. I'm not sure whether it affects the features out of the scope of TJWS support. We need to investigate on it.

> 
>>>  -- find . | grep pom.xml | grep -v arquillian | grep -v exam | grep -v
>>>  test | wc -l reports 58 pom.xml files
>>> - not clear where is the real code and what is just add-odd like examples,
>>> book stuff
>>> - naming of modules in not in sync, some are starting resteasy-*, some do
>>> not have such prefix
>>> 
>>> Commits:
>>> - commit messages do not follow same/similar format - see
>>> https://github.com/resteasy/Resteasy/commits/master
>>>  -- I would expect jira id at the beginning of the commit message, it's
>>>  there sometime but in different format - e.g. RESTEASY-1328 vs.
>>>  [RESTEASY-1331]
>>> - massive commit message like
>>> https://github.com/resteasy/Resteasy/commit/fdd1f9f31edb894fa6f8684f2608224c39519e6c
>>> - commit related to RESTEASY-1323 are really "fun"
>>>  -- https://github.com/resteasy/Resteasy/pull/756/files
>>>  -- one fix in code (4 lines removed) + two tests done in 7 commits :(
>>>  -- these commits should have been squashed
>> +1
>> 
>>> 
>>> Versions:
>>> - will leave this to Tomaz :)
>>> 
>>> TS:
>>> - unit tests are mixed with integration tests
>>>  -- integration tests should be in separate module
>>>  -- tests should be running in different maven phases
>>> - there are only few tests against WF
>>> - such tests are not executed against latest WF, but mainly against WF 8
>>> - I would like to see ARQ + WF10+ and get rid of tjws
>> Get ridding of TJWS is not practical because it will make the test time
>> unacceptable. But replacing them with undertow container would be great :-)
> 
> Do you have estimation how much time tjws saves ? And PRs are processed on external system (Travis atm) so I wouldn't be bothered if the TS runs for few minutes longer.
> 
> As proven by EAP QE internal resteasy testsuite, it's not revealing issues which could be eliminated before RESTEasy goes into the product.
> 
> For me Undertow container is not sufficient from product perspective, WF is needed.
> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> EAP 7 situation for TS:
>>> - we migrated upstream ts to use ARQ and run against EAP 7 and not tjws
>> 
>>> - we discovered half of reported issues thanks to this migrated TS, these
>>> issues wouldn't be noticed bu community TS executed against tjws
>> Totally removing TJWS is also not possible, because many users are using this
>> 'internal' feature in their production env. We can't estimate how the impact
>> will be.
>> 
>> We can try to remove TJWS for testing purposes in RESTEasy project itself.
> 
> +100
> 
>> But the RESTEasy TJWS module should be maintained as a feature.
> 
> I think it should be moved into separate repository with own release cycle. Not even sure if it should be under https://github.com/resteasy, but for now it would be sufficient ... I guess
> 
>> 
>>>  -- 19 from 38 jiras -
>>>  https://issues.jboss.org/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20JBEAP%20AND%20issuetype%20%3D%20Bug%20AND%20resolution%20in%20%28Unresolved%2C%20Done%2C%20%22Out%20of%20Date%22%29%20AND%20component%20%3D%20REST
>>> - we will keep this TS for 7.0.z
>>> - we would like to consume & prod-patch upstream (ARQ + WF based) TS for
>>> the future releases
>>> 
>>> Upstream and QE specific TS should somehow converge into a single one.
>> +1
> 
> This can only happen if the TS runs against WF as EAP is based on WF.
> ARQ here for some time and it is really preferred from our side.
> 
> 
> Regards.
> Rostislav
> 
>>> 
>>> My feeling is that (upstream) TS should be a bit isolated from the rest to
>>> make it easier for QE to test against products - like EAP.
>>> Something similar what is in JBWS and maybe even beyond - no dependency on
>>> parent to have deps clearly defined.
>>> For JBWS we consume upstream ts, patch it little bit + use prod based
>>> dependencies.
>>> 
>>> Cheers.
>>> Rostislav
>>> 
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> Hey Alessio,
>>>> 
>>>> yes setting up mailing list or even better forums on developer.jboss.org
>>>> would be great.
>>>> 
>>>> for the changes I had in mind from top of my head
>>>> - restructure project to move it one folder up so we, get rid of "jaxrs"
>>>> folder, but that can be done later
>>>> - unify versions of jetty used for tests
>>>> - make project build on various platforms and be able to release new
>>>> version maven-release-plugin
>>>> - get rid of tjws
>>>> - get rid of book
>>>> https://github.com/resteasy/Resteasy/tree/master/jaxrs/examples/oreilly-jaxrs-2.0-workbook
>>>> - probably best to move it to different repo
>>>> - think about examples, maybe move them to different repo or clean them up
>>>> so build would work properly.
>>>> 
>>>> and lots of other ideas, but that would just be cleaning up the codebase
>>>> so
>>>> it would be easier to work from there.
>>>> 
>>>> But yes, lets talk about it next week, as I also have some stuff to finish
>>>> this week.
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> tomaz
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 9:38 PM, Alessio Soldano <asoldano at redhat.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Hi Rostislav, hi Tomaz,
>>>>> thanks for the references. We'll have to go and parse the changes (and
>>>>> also see what still applies and what would be out-of-date ;-) ).
>>>>> Generally speaking, why not, let's listen to what "stage 0" tasks you
>>>>> have
>>>>> in mind. I'm very busy till the end of the week, but I hope to have time
>>>>> to
>>>>> spend on this next week. I'm still fixing few things with the team,
>>>>> including having jboss mailing lists for the project.. if it makes sense
>>>>> to
>>>>> you, I would propose to have some discussion on the proposed tasks on a
>>>>> dev
>>>>> mailing list, ok?
>>>>> Cheers
>>>>> Alessio
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Il 28/04/2016 18:10, Rostislav Svoboda ha scritto:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Hi Alessio.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Several months ago I spoke with Tomaz about RESTEasy and Tomaz's effort
>>>>>> with project cleanup + version sync. For example
>>>>>> https://github.com/resteasy/Resteasy/commit/1f95cefc716d88533551c282977aa9b0ba2a8f10
>>>>>> was merged, probably some more ideas are waiting for sunlight in
>>>>>> branches
>>>>>> like https://github.com/ctomc/Resteasy/tree/build-cleanup
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I pinged Tomaz today because of that and we spoke a bit about RESTEasy,
>>>>>> Tomaz has some ideas for few "stage 0" tasks that should be done before
>>>>>> anything else is going on. He [CCed to confirm that ;)] is also wiling
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> take few days to work on it if we agree on them being merged.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> So here we go, discussion can begin. Hope RESTEasy project structure
>>>>>> will
>>>>>> be in good condition soon!
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Cheers.
>>>>>> Rostislav
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> --
>>>>> Alessio Soldano
>>>>> Web Service Lead, JBoss
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> resteasy-dev mailing list
>>> resteasy-dev at lists.jboss.org
>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/resteasy-dev
>> 
>> 