[weld-dev] [cdi-dev] How would I go about getting a snapshot build of Weld out?

Fri Apr 17 11:04:31 EDT 2020

Awesome, thanks a lot!
I'll soon be going off for the weekend, so on Mon I can pick that up and try to put it all together locally and see what's the issue.

Matej

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Scott Stark" <sstark at redhat.com>
> To: "Matej Novotny" <manovotn at redhat.com>
> Cc: "weld-dev" <weld-dev at lists.jboss.org>
> Sent: Friday, April 17, 2020 4:38:16 PM
> Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] How would I go about getting a snapshot build of Weld out?
> 
> I just replaced the previous PR with one that targets master. I seemed to
> need to update quite a few more things or somehow did not notice their
> impact when being based off the 3.0 branch. It is relying on snapshot
> builds of weld-api, arquillian-core, and arquillian-weld-embedded. I
> believe I have all of this documented in the root JakartaEE9.adoc.
> 
> The current failures look like that the weld-se test classpath is not
> including the weld-spi classes, but I have not had time to look into the
> details.
> 
> 
> On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 9:28 AM Matej Novotny <manovotn at redhat.com> wrote:
> 
> > Hmm, I am not sure I am on that list, even though I am pretty sure I
> > applied earlier. Will try again.
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Scott Stark" <sstark at redhat.com>
> > > To: "Matej Novotny" <manovotn at redhat.com>
> > > Cc: "weld-dev" <weld-dev at lists.jboss.org>
> > > Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2020 3:32:07 PM
> > > Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] How would I go about getting a snapshot build of
> > Weld out?
> > >
> > > Ok, I'll look at the comments.
> > >
> > > There is someone on the jakartaee redhat list who can do the Arq release.
> > >
> > > On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 8:29 AM Matej Novotny <manovotn at redhat.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > I've added comments to both PRs.
> > > >
> > > > Meanwhile, on weld core and api I created 3.1 branches so master can
> > move
> > > > on to 4.x snapshots.
> > > > Weld JIRA now also holds a version for 4.0.0.Alpha1 the date being
> > > > tentative based on other releases we need to do.
> > > > I also plan to look into CI and other setups that will be needed to
> > have
> > > > some testing enabled (currently with pack. changes all PRs will
> > inevitably
> > > > fail since they run against WFLY).
> > > >
> > > > We also need to find someone who has the power to release Arq and align
> > > > the release with them.
> > > > I can see us going for (1) Arq. core release, then (2)weld-arq.
> > container
> > > > and then (3) weld api and core.
> > > >
> > > > Matej
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > From: "Scott Stark" <sstark at redhat.com>
> > > > > To: "Matej Novotny" <manovotn at redhat.com>
> > > > > Cc: "weld-dev" <weld-dev at lists.jboss.org>
> > > > > Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2020 2:34:02 AM
> > > > > Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] How would I go about getting a snapshot build
> > of
> > > > Weld out?
> > > > >
> > > > > I have a fork of the arq core that I have created a PR from to add
> > > > Jakarta
> > > > > EE 9 based testenrichers:
> > > > > https://github.com/arquillian/arquillian-core/pull/238
> > > > >
> > > > > The updated weld 4.0 branch PR has just been created as well:
> > > > > https://github.com/weld/core/pull/1979
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 7:11 PM Matej Novotny <manovotn at redhat.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hmm, arq. test enricher has some ancient dependencies. In fact,
> > they
> > > > rely
> > > > > > on CDI 1.0 (and therefore Weld 1.x). Looking closely at the code,
> > it
> > > > looks
> > > > > > like Weld dependency is only needed for tests, for actual impl, CDI
> > > > will
> > > > > > do.
> > > > > > And the test can be re-written to avoid using Weld internal
> > completely
> > > > > > assuming we are on CDI 2.0+, here is how -
> > > > > > https://github.com/arquillian/arquillian-core/pull/239. With this
> > > > change
> > > > > > you only need to pass in CDI SE impl as test dependency and it will
> > > > work
> > > > > > (still means you need one release for another though, so one has to
> > > > release
> > > > > > without tests passing).
> > > > > > However, the actual issue in Arq. is that it now looks for now
> > outdated
> > > > > > annotation[1].
> > > > > > Which I presume is something you have fixed locally? I did check
> > your
> > > > > > repos but couldn't find fork of Arq. core. I can fix that as well
> > if
> > > > you
> > > > > > don't have it already.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I've also checked other repos:
> > > > > >  * The core PR[2] you closed was built from Weld's 3.0 branch
> > which is
> > > > > > wrong, we need that against current master to be up to date
> > > > > >   - on the PR you said you have something else already, can you
> > push it
> > > > > > please? If you don't have it, I can do that as well; I just don't
> > want
> > > > to
> > > > > > duplicate work
> > > > > >  * API PR[3] misses one commit from current master, otherwise it's
> > good
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > Matej
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > ______________________________________________________________________________________________
> > > > > > [1]
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > https://github.com/arquillian/arquillian-core/blob/master/testenrichers/cdi/src/main/java/org/jboss/arquillian/testenricher/cdi/CDIInjectionEnricher.java#L37
> > > > > > [2] https://github.com/weld/core/pull/1956
> > > > > > [3] https://github.com/weld/api/pull/91
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> 