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

Wed May 4 13:01:39 EDT 2016

On 05/04/2016 11:36 AM, Weinan Li wrote:
> --
> Weinan Li / JBoss
>
>> On May 4, 2016, at 8:02 PM, 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.

They go into the distribution zip file.

>
>>    -- 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]

Even better is the whole URL, so you can click and go there.

>> - 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

At some point I started adding new arquillian tests to RESTEASY-TEST-WF8 
to reduce the number of times wildfly starts up. I have a 
RESTEASY-TEST-WF10, but it depends on JDK 1.8, so it's not activated yet.

>> - 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 :-)

A lot of tests just don't depend on the environment. I create arquillian 
tests only when the environment seems to matter. I agree it would be 
nice to use undertow, but who's going to take the time to do that?

>>
>> 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.

Yeah, I learned that only recently. I'm amazed. But it's true: "If it's 
there, they'll use it."

>
> We can try to remove TJWS for testing purposes in RESTEasy project itself. But the RESTEasy TJWS module should be maintained as a feature.
>
>>    -- 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
>
>> 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> resteasy-dev mailing list
> resteasy-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/resteasy-dev

-- 
My company's smarter than your company (unless you work for Red Hat)