[wildfly-dev] Updating the WildFly archetypes

[Eduardo Martins]

Hi Wolfgang, fyi just got back from some time off, and should be able to look at this next week.

—E

> On 11 Sep 2019, at 20:18, Wolfgang Knauf <wolfgang.knauf at gmx.de> wrote:
> 
> Hi Eduardo,
> 
> once again a reminder for
> https://github.com/wildfly/wildfly-archetypes/pull/5  ;-).
> I updated the two archetypes to use WildFly 17.0.Final.
> 
> Best regards
> 
> Wolfgang
> 
> Am 07.08.19 um 22:35 schrieb Wolfgang Knauf:
>> Hi Eduardo,
>> 
>> wanted to ask for an update on this pull request.
>> 
>> It is already outdated, as WildFly 17 is now final and all versions in
>> pom.xml should be updated...
>> 
>> Best regards
>> 
>> Wolfgang
>> 
>> Am 16.06.19 um 14:12 schrieb Wolfgang Knauf:
>>> Hi Eduardo,
>>> 
>>> i sent a pull request for this new archetype, without beans.xml.
>>> Depending on your findings, we can add it afterwards if necessary.
>>> 
>>> But as far as I understand it, this file is optional now
>>> (https://blogs.oracle.com/theaquarium/default-cdi-enablement-in-java-ee-7)
>>> - so this could be considered a bug...
>>> 
>>> Best regards
>>> 
>>> Wolfgang
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Am 12.06.19 um 22:37 schrieb Eduardo Martins:
>>>> Hi Wolfgang, when reviewing it seemed to me that in the *ear*
>>>> archetype the beans.xml was not needed. I can’t tell if that’s the
>>>> case for this new archetype without you submitting it for review, but
>>>> if it fails to deploy without it… ;-)
>>>> 
>>>> —E
>>>> 
>>>>> On 12 Jun 2019, at 20:57, Wolfgang Knauf <wolfgang.knauf at gmx.de> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Hi to all,
>>>>> 
>>>>> just wanted to ask for an update: do you think that the error
>>>>> message is
>>>>> acceptable and I should create the archetype without "beans.xml" anyway
>>>>> (and add an info to the readme.txt file)?
>>>>> Or should I add a default "beans.xml" to the archetype to avoid it?
>>>>> Or is it worth a JIRA?
>>>>> 
>>>>> Best regards
>>>>> 
>>>>> Wolfgang
>>>>> 
>>>>> Am 05.06.19 um 21:42 schrieb Wolfgang Knauf:
>>>>>> Hi Eduardo,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> while building a "wildfly-javaee-webapp-archetype", I think I found a
>>>>>> small WildFly issue: you remember that you pointed me to the fact that
>>>>>> "beans.xml" is optional?
>>>>>> But when creating a blank project from my new web archetype (which
>>>>>> defines a "faces-config.xml", but no "beans.xml"), the attached
>>>>>> error is
>>>>>> in the WildFly console. But it seems the app is deployed anyway.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The error disappears if I add e.g. an annotated EJB, or if I add a
>>>>>> "beans.xml".
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Do you think this is a WildFly bug? Or should I add a default
>>>>>> "beans.xml" just to avoid this error?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I did not test it with a blank project from the EAR archetype -
>>>>>> will do
>>>>>> this in the next few days.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Best regards
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Wolfgang
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Am 03.06.19 um 21:36 schrieb Wolfgang Knauf:
>>>>>>> Thanks for the deploy, Eduardo!
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> If you consider it reasonable I will create an archetype for "web app
>>>>>>> only", similar to the old "wildfly-javaee7-webapp-archetype".
>>>>>>> But I will probably need a few weeks...
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> What happens to the old archetype
>>>>>>> "wildfly-javaee7-webapp-ear-archetype"? It could be deleted, as it
>>>>>>> does not build anyway. It might be relevant only for research.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Best regards
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Wolfgang
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Am 03.06.19 um 17:05 schrieb Brian Stansberry:
>>>>>>>> Excellent!  Thank you so much Wolfgang!
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 9:52 AM Eduardo Martins <emartins at redhat.com
>>>>>>>> <mailto:emartins at redhat.com>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>      Wolfgang: yours and mine PRs are merged, and when WFLY 17
>>>>>>>> Final is
>>>>>>>>      out I will also deploy the archetype, thanks a lot for your
>>>>>>>>      contribution! Yet now I have to ask, do you plan to submit
>>>>>>>> similar
>>>>>>>>      for the other old javaee archetype? :-)
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>      Brian: yep it was just the JDK, I will deploy these too (no
>>>>>>>> planned
>>>>>>>>      updates in such code tho)
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>      —E
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>      On 16 May 2019, at 10:09, Eduardo Martins <emartins at redhat.com
>>>>>>>>>      <mailto:emartins at redhat.com>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>      Hmm ok, maybe it just failed build due to some specific
>>>>>>>>> like JDK
>>>>>>>>>      11, will recheck that.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>      —E
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>      On 16 May 2019, at 02:25, Brian Stansberry
>>>>>>>>>>      <brian.stansberry at redhat.com
>>>>>>>>>>      <mailto:brian.stansberry at redhat.com>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>      These build for me.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>      They're not as out of date as I'd thought either.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>      On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 6:34 PM Eduardo Martins
>>>>>>>>>>      <emartins at redhat.com <mailto:emartins at redhat.com>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>          If you think it’s not a small effort task then certainly
>>>>>>>>>>          agree that’s not a blocker, I look at the archetypes
>>>>>>>>>> same way
>>>>>>>>>>          as the quickstarts,  an aggregation project, so we may
>>>>>>>>>> take
>>>>>>>>>>          outdated/faulty ones out of build and release the
>>>>>>>>>>          working+actual ones. We may give it a thought later if it
>>>>>>>>>>          makes sense effort wise to update or drop the
>>>>>>>>>> subsystem ones,
>>>>>>>>>>          no worries.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>          —E
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>