You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to user@commons.apache.org by Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu> on 2019/04/18 15:23:29 UTC
status and release of commons-scxml-2.0?
Hi developers/community,
I've received an out-of-band request about the current status of
commons-scxml-2.0 and its release schedule.
As there might be more (hopefully at least a few) people interested in
this, and I don't like answering out-of-band questions, I'm giving
a heads-up here for the whole community.
To be absolutely clear upfront: I've dropped the ball on this (again)
since my last burst of changes early 2018.
I simply didn't, and still don't, have the cycles and priority to work
on this beyond maybe minimally answering a few questions now and then.
Now, there have been only very few questions in the last several years,
and luckily Woonsan (who is a remote colleague of mine in our d2d job)
stepped in to help with those as well.
So practically, there hasn't been much demand or pressure to wrap-up
the work and finish the 2.0 release.
And neither from my d2d job (we're still happily using the 2.0-M1
release without problems so far).
But technically, the current master branch towards the 2.0 release *is*
practically done and ready to be tagged and released. If/when a few
remaining cleanup and polishing tasks are completed...
The current master branch *is* already fully compliant with the W3C
SCXML 1.0 specification, including passing all the W3C (IRP) tests for
it. At least, when using the jexl or groovy script languages.
And the Common SCXML 2.0 engine IMO is pretty cool and convenient to
use, for those who like/need a formalized statemachine engine.
Only for the javascript language (using Java 8 Nashorn, now deprecated
since Java 11...) there are still 3/188 W3C IRP tests failing.
And those 3 test failures are really, really difficult to fix, because
of limitations/quirks in the Nashorn engine itself.
So that is where I got 'stuck'.
I honestly lost interest and desire to try fix this, given that Nashorn
now is deprecated in Java 11 anyway, I don't think anyone is actually
using/waiting for the javascript language support to begin with, and so
I rather just/simply rip out the whole javascript language support and
be done with it.
And then, there is the remaining work to:
a) Fix/remove/replace existing documentation, which is still mostly
based upon the last 0.9 release from more than a decade ago.
To do this properly is/would be a major effort in itself, as the
commons-scxml-2.0 API is really, really different now.
b) Fix/configure the site generation itself (I'm actually clueless)
c) Check/adjust current checkstyle and other build/release reports to be
more in line with the common practices for Apache Commons projects?
For task a) I assume I'd have to take first responsibility,
possible/hopefully with some help from Woonsan, because 80+% of the code
and API changes were made by me, the rest by Woonsan.
However I honestly don't have the cycles to do this properly right now.
But if it is acceptable to only do the bare minimum, and at least remove
the out-of-date examples and just have a basic/minimal 'getting
started' page, I could pull that off in a few weeks time.
For task b) I assume other devs may be able to help out a bit: I just
needs some explanation and clarification how this (now) is supposed to
work.
Lastly, for task c) I don't know what the current/common policy is or
should be: the only thing I realized is that the current reporting
configuration is extremely old (10+ years) and might need adjusting.
I guess this is also something other Commons devs might be able to
explain or even help out with?
Looking forward to further input, and hopefully some offered help,
because I really would like to wrap this up, sometime soon.
Regards,
Ate
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@commons.apache.org
Re: status and release of commons-scxml-2.0?
Posted by Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de>.
Well the Apache PLC4X Project would definitely welcome a soon release of 2.0.0 as currently all modules related to SCXML have to be disabled for releases.
So I agree that it would be better to finally release a 2.0.0 and to pass a 2.1.0 with additional stuff later on.
Chris
Am 23.04.19, 15:50 schrieb "Ate Douma" <at...@douma.nu>:
Hi Jake,
On 19/04/2019 16.15, Jacob Beard wrote:
> Hi Ate,
>
> Thanks for your reply. I think I could help with these issues, and close the gap for full compliance of the js language model.
That would be great and definitely appreciated.
But that said: I'm still worried if it actually is worth the effort.
Because: who is looking for or (still) waiting for js language
support in commons-scxml?
Community wise, there have been no concrete questions or requests
concerning the js language for many years.
And with the Nashorn engine now deprecated, the current implementation
is besides being incomplete, not sustainable in the long run anyway.
Of course we could consider adding support for GraalVM instead, but is
anyone really asking or waiting for that either?
We currently have pretty solid and SCXML compliant language support with
jexl and groovy, which might be good enough in practice for many, if not
all, of the community.
What I really dislike is further delaying the 2.0 release just because
of the incomplete js language support, and with a unclear idea if it
ever can/will be completed.
Although I personally would still vote +1 to remove js language support,
I also can agree to keep it for a while longer to allow others like you
to chime in and try completing.
But pending that uncertain outcome, I rather proceed with the 2.0
release ASAP anyway, explicitly stating the js language support is not
finished and to be considered alpha or beta.
>
> I was wondering, did you have a timeline in mind for the 2.0 release? I should start to free up in June/July.
I may be able to spend some cycles the coming month (May) to proceed
with the above idea and work towards a 2.0 release, independent of the
js language support status.
Once we have a 2.0 release out, we can (more) easily roll out newer
minor/patch releases thereafter for improved js language support if and
when we get that incorporated.
Regards,
Ate
>
> Let me know what you think. Thank you,
>
> Jake
>
>> On Apr 18, 2019, at 3:46 PM, Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> On 18/04/2019 18.00, Jacob Beard wrote:
>>> Hi Ate,
>>>> On Apr 18, 2019, at 11:23 AM, Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Only for the javascript language (using Java 8 Nashorn, now deprecated
>>>> since Java 11...) there are still 3/188 W3C IRP tests failing.
>>>> And those 3 test failures are really, really difficult to fix, because
>>>> of limitations/quirks in the Nashorn engine itself.
>>> Could you please provide more information on this? Which tests are failing, and what are the limitations and quirks of Nashorn that cause this?
>>
>> Sure.
>>
>> Regarding 'quirks': see issue SCXML-273 [1] which concerns the problem
>> that the Nashorn engine by default doesn't fail on referencing a missing
>> property. Which is tested by W3C IRP test 307.
>>
>> Regarding limitations: there are two W3C IRP ecma test, 557 and 561,
>> which make use of XML DOM APIs in a condition, like:
>>
>> cond="var1.getElementsByTagName('book')[0].getAttribute('title') == 'title1'"
>>
>> However Nashorn doesn't provide default/native XML DOM support, and
>> adding that would be (at least from my perspective) quite an effort, if
>> even properly doable.
>> That doesn't feel like worth the effort, with little added value/ROI.
>>
>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SCXML-273
>>
>>> Thank you,
>>> Jake
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@commons.apache.org
>>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: status and release of commons-scxml-2.0?
Posted by Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu>.
Hi Jake,
On 19/04/2019 16.15, Jacob Beard wrote:
> Hi Ate,
>
> Thanks for your reply. I think I could help with these issues, and close the gap for full compliance of the js language model.
That would be great and definitely appreciated.
But that said: I'm still worried if it actually is worth the effort.
Because: who is looking for or (still) waiting for js language
support in commons-scxml?
Community wise, there have been no concrete questions or requests
concerning the js language for many years.
And with the Nashorn engine now deprecated, the current implementation
is besides being incomplete, not sustainable in the long run anyway.
Of course we could consider adding support for GraalVM instead, but is
anyone really asking or waiting for that either?
We currently have pretty solid and SCXML compliant language support with
jexl and groovy, which might be good enough in practice for many, if not
all, of the community.
What I really dislike is further delaying the 2.0 release just because
of the incomplete js language support, and with a unclear idea if it
ever can/will be completed.
Although I personally would still vote +1 to remove js language support,
I also can agree to keep it for a while longer to allow others like you
to chime in and try completing.
But pending that uncertain outcome, I rather proceed with the 2.0
release ASAP anyway, explicitly stating the js language support is not
finished and to be considered alpha or beta.
>
> I was wondering, did you have a timeline in mind for the 2.0 release? I should start to free up in June/July.
I may be able to spend some cycles the coming month (May) to proceed
with the above idea and work towards a 2.0 release, independent of the
js language support status.
Once we have a 2.0 release out, we can (more) easily roll out newer
minor/patch releases thereafter for improved js language support if and
when we get that incorporated.
Regards,
Ate
>
> Let me know what you think. Thank you,
>
> Jake
>
>> On Apr 18, 2019, at 3:46 PM, Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> On 18/04/2019 18.00, Jacob Beard wrote:
>>> Hi Ate,
>>>> On Apr 18, 2019, at 11:23 AM, Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Only for the javascript language (using Java 8 Nashorn, now deprecated
>>>> since Java 11...) there are still 3/188 W3C IRP tests failing.
>>>> And those 3 test failures are really, really difficult to fix, because
>>>> of limitations/quirks in the Nashorn engine itself.
>>> Could you please provide more information on this? Which tests are failing, and what are the limitations and quirks of Nashorn that cause this?
>>
>> Sure.
>>
>> Regarding 'quirks': see issue SCXML-273 [1] which concerns the problem
>> that the Nashorn engine by default doesn't fail on referencing a missing
>> property. Which is tested by W3C IRP test 307.
>>
>> Regarding limitations: there are two W3C IRP ecma test, 557 and 561,
>> which make use of XML DOM APIs in a condition, like:
>>
>> cond="var1.getElementsByTagName('book')[0].getAttribute('title') == 'title1'"
>>
>> However Nashorn doesn't provide default/native XML DOM support, and
>> adding that would be (at least from my perspective) quite an effort, if
>> even properly doable.
>> That doesn't feel like worth the effort, with little added value/ROI.
>>
>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SCXML-273
>>
>>> Thank you,
>>> Jake
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@commons.apache.org
>>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: status and release of commons-scxml-2.0?
Posted by Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu>.
Hi Jake,
On 19/04/2019 16.15, Jacob Beard wrote:
> Hi Ate,
>
> Thanks for your reply. I think I could help with these issues, and close the gap for full compliance of the js language model.
That would be great and definitely appreciated.
But that said: I'm still worried if it actually is worth the effort.
Because: who is looking for or (still) waiting for js language
support in commons-scxml?
Community wise, there have been no concrete questions or requests
concerning the js language for many years.
And with the Nashorn engine now deprecated, the current implementation
is besides being incomplete, not sustainable in the long run anyway.
Of course we could consider adding support for GraalVM instead, but is
anyone really asking or waiting for that either?
We currently have pretty solid and SCXML compliant language support with
jexl and groovy, which might be good enough in practice for many, if not
all, of the community.
What I really dislike is further delaying the 2.0 release just because
of the incomplete js language support, and with a unclear idea if it
ever can/will be completed.
Although I personally would still vote +1 to remove js language support,
I also can agree to keep it for a while longer to allow others like you
to chime in and try completing.
But pending that uncertain outcome, I rather proceed with the 2.0
release ASAP anyway, explicitly stating the js language support is not
finished and to be considered alpha or beta.
>
> I was wondering, did you have a timeline in mind for the 2.0 release? I should start to free up in June/July.
I may be able to spend some cycles the coming month (May) to proceed
with the above idea and work towards a 2.0 release, independent of the
js language support status.
Once we have a 2.0 release out, we can (more) easily roll out newer
minor/patch releases thereafter for improved js language support if and
when we get that incorporated.
Regards,
Ate
>
> Let me know what you think. Thank you,
>
> Jake
>
>> On Apr 18, 2019, at 3:46 PM, Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> On 18/04/2019 18.00, Jacob Beard wrote:
>>> Hi Ate,
>>>> On Apr 18, 2019, at 11:23 AM, Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Only for the javascript language (using Java 8 Nashorn, now deprecated
>>>> since Java 11...) there are still 3/188 W3C IRP tests failing.
>>>> And those 3 test failures are really, really difficult to fix, because
>>>> of limitations/quirks in the Nashorn engine itself.
>>> Could you please provide more information on this? Which tests are failing, and what are the limitations and quirks of Nashorn that cause this?
>>
>> Sure.
>>
>> Regarding 'quirks': see issue SCXML-273 [1] which concerns the problem
>> that the Nashorn engine by default doesn't fail on referencing a missing
>> property. Which is tested by W3C IRP test 307.
>>
>> Regarding limitations: there are two W3C IRP ecma test, 557 and 561,
>> which make use of XML DOM APIs in a condition, like:
>>
>> cond="var1.getElementsByTagName('book')[0].getAttribute('title') == 'title1'"
>>
>> However Nashorn doesn't provide default/native XML DOM support, and
>> adding that would be (at least from my perspective) quite an effort, if
>> even properly doable.
>> That doesn't feel like worth the effort, with little added value/ROI.
>>
>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SCXML-273
>>
>>> Thank you,
>>> Jake
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@commons.apache.org
>>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@commons.apache.org
Re: status and release of commons-scxml-2.0?
Posted by Jacob Beard <ja...@jacobeanrnd.com>.
Hi Ate,
Thanks for your reply. I think I could help with these issues, and close the gap for full compliance of the js language model.
I was wondering, did you have a timeline in mind for the 2.0 release? I should start to free up in June/July.
Let me know what you think. Thank you,
Jake
> On Apr 18, 2019, at 3:46 PM, Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu> wrote:
>
>
>
>> On 18/04/2019 18.00, Jacob Beard wrote:
>> Hi Ate,
>>> On Apr 18, 2019, at 11:23 AM, Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu> wrote:
>>>
>>> Only for the javascript language (using Java 8 Nashorn, now deprecated
>>> since Java 11...) there are still 3/188 W3C IRP tests failing.
>>> And those 3 test failures are really, really difficult to fix, because
>>> of limitations/quirks in the Nashorn engine itself.
>> Could you please provide more information on this? Which tests are failing, and what are the limitations and quirks of Nashorn that cause this?
>
> Sure.
>
> Regarding 'quirks': see issue SCXML-273 [1] which concerns the problem
> that the Nashorn engine by default doesn't fail on referencing a missing
> property. Which is tested by W3C IRP test 307.
>
> Regarding limitations: there are two W3C IRP ecma test, 557 and 561,
> which make use of XML DOM APIs in a condition, like:
>
> cond="var1.getElementsByTagName('book')[0].getAttribute('title') == 'title1'"
>
> However Nashorn doesn't provide default/native XML DOM support, and
> adding that would be (at least from my perspective) quite an effort, if
> even properly doable.
> That doesn't feel like worth the effort, with little added value/ROI.
>
> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SCXML-273
>
>> Thank you,
>> Jake
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@commons.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: status and release of commons-scxml-2.0?
Posted by Jacob Beard <ja...@jacobeanrnd.com>.
Hi Ate,
Thanks for your reply. I think I could help with these issues, and close the gap for full compliance of the js language model.
I was wondering, did you have a timeline in mind for the 2.0 release? I should start to free up in June/July.
Let me know what you think. Thank you,
Jake
> On Apr 18, 2019, at 3:46 PM, Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu> wrote:
>
>
>
>> On 18/04/2019 18.00, Jacob Beard wrote:
>> Hi Ate,
>>> On Apr 18, 2019, at 11:23 AM, Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu> wrote:
>>>
>>> Only for the javascript language (using Java 8 Nashorn, now deprecated
>>> since Java 11...) there are still 3/188 W3C IRP tests failing.
>>> And those 3 test failures are really, really difficult to fix, because
>>> of limitations/quirks in the Nashorn engine itself.
>> Could you please provide more information on this? Which tests are failing, and what are the limitations and quirks of Nashorn that cause this?
>
> Sure.
>
> Regarding 'quirks': see issue SCXML-273 [1] which concerns the problem
> that the Nashorn engine by default doesn't fail on referencing a missing
> property. Which is tested by W3C IRP test 307.
>
> Regarding limitations: there are two W3C IRP ecma test, 557 and 561,
> which make use of XML DOM APIs in a condition, like:
>
> cond="var1.getElementsByTagName('book')[0].getAttribute('title') == 'title1'"
>
> However Nashorn doesn't provide default/native XML DOM support, and
> adding that would be (at least from my perspective) quite an effort, if
> even properly doable.
> That doesn't feel like worth the effort, with little added value/ROI.
>
> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SCXML-273
>
>> Thank you,
>> Jake
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@commons.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@commons.apache.org
Re: status and release of commons-scxml-2.0?
Posted by Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu>.
On 18/04/2019 18.00, Jacob Beard wrote:
> Hi Ate,
>
>> On Apr 18, 2019, at 11:23 AM, Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu> wrote:
>>
>> Only for the javascript language (using Java 8 Nashorn, now deprecated
>> since Java 11...) there are still 3/188 W3C IRP tests failing.
>> And those 3 test failures are really, really difficult to fix, because
>> of limitations/quirks in the Nashorn engine itself.
>
> Could you please provide more information on this? Which tests are failing, and what are the limitations and quirks of Nashorn that cause this?
Sure.
Regarding 'quirks': see issue SCXML-273 [1] which concerns the problem
that the Nashorn engine by default doesn't fail on referencing a missing
property. Which is tested by W3C IRP test 307.
Regarding limitations: there are two W3C IRP ecma test, 557 and 561,
which make use of XML DOM APIs in a condition, like:
cond="var1.getElementsByTagName('book')[0].getAttribute('title') ==
'title1'"
However Nashorn doesn't provide default/native XML DOM support, and
adding that would be (at least from my perspective) quite an effort, if
even properly doable.
That doesn't feel like worth the effort, with little added value/ROI.
[1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SCXML-273
>
> Thank you,
>
> Jake
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@commons.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@commons.apache.org
Re: status and release of commons-scxml-2.0?
Posted by Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu>.
On 18/04/2019 18.00, Jacob Beard wrote:
> Hi Ate,
>
>> On Apr 18, 2019, at 11:23 AM, Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu> wrote:
>>
>> Only for the javascript language (using Java 8 Nashorn, now deprecated
>> since Java 11...) there are still 3/188 W3C IRP tests failing.
>> And those 3 test failures are really, really difficult to fix, because
>> of limitations/quirks in the Nashorn engine itself.
>
> Could you please provide more information on this? Which tests are failing, and what are the limitations and quirks of Nashorn that cause this?
Sure.
Regarding 'quirks': see issue SCXML-273 [1] which concerns the problem
that the Nashorn engine by default doesn't fail on referencing a missing
property. Which is tested by W3C IRP test 307.
Regarding limitations: there are two W3C IRP ecma test, 557 and 561,
which make use of XML DOM APIs in a condition, like:
cond="var1.getElementsByTagName('book')[0].getAttribute('title') ==
'title1'"
However Nashorn doesn't provide default/native XML DOM support, and
adding that would be (at least from my perspective) quite an effort, if
even properly doable.
That doesn't feel like worth the effort, with little added value/ROI.
[1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SCXML-273
>
> Thank you,
>
> Jake
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@commons.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: status and release of commons-scxml-2.0?
Posted by Jacob Beard <ja...@jacobeanrnd.com>.
Hi Ate,
> On Apr 18, 2019, at 11:23 AM, Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu> wrote:
>
> Only for the javascript language (using Java 8 Nashorn, now deprecated
> since Java 11...) there are still 3/188 W3C IRP tests failing.
> And those 3 test failures are really, really difficult to fix, because
> of limitations/quirks in the Nashorn engine itself.
Could you please provide more information on this? Which tests are failing, and what are the limitations and quirks of Nashorn that cause this?
Thank you,
Jake
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@commons.apache.org
Re: status and release of commons-scxml-2.0?
Posted by Diptendu Dutta <du...@gmail.com>.
Hello Team,
I am writing to let you know that like many others I greatly value the work
being
done on commons-scxml and look forward to release 2.0.
Please keep up the good work.
Regards,
Diptendu Dutta
On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 9:04 PM Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu> wrote:
> Hi developers/community,
>
> I've received an out-of-band request about the current status of
> commons-scxml-2.0 and its release schedule.
>
> As there might be more (hopefully at least a few) people interested in
> this, and I don't like answering out-of-band questions, I'm giving
> a heads-up here for the whole community.
>
> To be absolutely clear upfront: I've dropped the ball on this (again)
> since my last burst of changes early 2018.
> I simply didn't, and still don't, have the cycles and priority to work
> on this beyond maybe minimally answering a few questions now and then.
>
> Now, there have been only very few questions in the last several years,
> and luckily Woonsan (who is a remote colleague of mine in our d2d job)
> stepped in to help with those as well.
> So practically, there hasn't been much demand or pressure to wrap-up
> the work and finish the 2.0 release.
> And neither from my d2d job (we're still happily using the 2.0-M1
> release without problems so far).
>
> But technically, the current master branch towards the 2.0 release *is*
> practically done and ready to be tagged and released. If/when a few
> remaining cleanup and polishing tasks are completed...
>
> The current master branch *is* already fully compliant with the W3C
> SCXML 1.0 specification, including passing all the W3C (IRP) tests for
> it. At least, when using the jexl or groovy script languages.
> And the Common SCXML 2.0 engine IMO is pretty cool and convenient to
> use, for those who like/need a formalized statemachine engine.
>
> Only for the javascript language (using Java 8 Nashorn, now deprecated
> since Java 11...) there are still 3/188 W3C IRP tests failing.
> And those 3 test failures are really, really difficult to fix, because
> of limitations/quirks in the Nashorn engine itself.
> So that is where I got 'stuck'.
> I honestly lost interest and desire to try fix this, given that Nashorn
> now is deprecated in Java 11 anyway, I don't think anyone is actually
> using/waiting for the javascript language support to begin with, and so
> I rather just/simply rip out the whole javascript language support and
> be done with it.
>
> And then, there is the remaining work to:
> a) Fix/remove/replace existing documentation, which is still mostly
> based upon the last 0.9 release from more than a decade ago.
> To do this properly is/would be a major effort in itself, as the
> commons-scxml-2.0 API is really, really different now.
> b) Fix/configure the site generation itself (I'm actually clueless)
> c) Check/adjust current checkstyle and other build/release reports to be
> more in line with the common practices for Apache Commons projects?
>
> For task a) I assume I'd have to take first responsibility,
> possible/hopefully with some help from Woonsan, because 80+% of the code
> and API changes were made by me, the rest by Woonsan.
> However I honestly don't have the cycles to do this properly right now.
> But if it is acceptable to only do the bare minimum, and at least remove
> the out-of-date examples and just have a basic/minimal 'getting
> started' page, I could pull that off in a few weeks time.
>
> For task b) I assume other devs may be able to help out a bit: I just
> needs some explanation and clarification how this (now) is supposed to
> work.
>
> Lastly, for task c) I don't know what the current/common policy is or
> should be: the only thing I realized is that the current reporting
> configuration is extremely old (10+ years) and might need adjusting.
> I guess this is also something other Commons devs might be able to
> explain or even help out with?
>
> Looking forward to further input, and hopefully some offered help,
> because I really would like to wrap this up, sometime soon.
>
> Regards,
> Ate
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@commons.apache.org
>
>
Re: status and release of commons-scxml-2.0?
Posted by Jacob Beard <ja...@jacobeanrnd.com>.
Hi Ate,
> On Apr 18, 2019, at 11:23 AM, Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu> wrote:
>
> Only for the javascript language (using Java 8 Nashorn, now deprecated
> since Java 11...) there are still 3/188 W3C IRP tests failing.
> And those 3 test failures are really, really difficult to fix, because
> of limitations/quirks in the Nashorn engine itself.
Could you please provide more information on this? Which tests are failing, and what are the limitations and quirks of Nashorn that cause this?
Thank you,
Jake
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: status and release of commons-scxml-2.0?
Posted by Diptendu Dutta <du...@gmail.com>.
Hello Team,
I am writing to let you know that like many others I greatly value the work
being
done on commons-scxml and look forward to release 2.0.
Please keep up the good work.
Regards,
Diptendu Dutta
On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 9:04 PM Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu> wrote:
> Hi developers/community,
>
> I've received an out-of-band request about the current status of
> commons-scxml-2.0 and its release schedule.
>
> As there might be more (hopefully at least a few) people interested in
> this, and I don't like answering out-of-band questions, I'm giving
> a heads-up here for the whole community.
>
> To be absolutely clear upfront: I've dropped the ball on this (again)
> since my last burst of changes early 2018.
> I simply didn't, and still don't, have the cycles and priority to work
> on this beyond maybe minimally answering a few questions now and then.
>
> Now, there have been only very few questions in the last several years,
> and luckily Woonsan (who is a remote colleague of mine in our d2d job)
> stepped in to help with those as well.
> So practically, there hasn't been much demand or pressure to wrap-up
> the work and finish the 2.0 release.
> And neither from my d2d job (we're still happily using the 2.0-M1
> release without problems so far).
>
> But technically, the current master branch towards the 2.0 release *is*
> practically done and ready to be tagged and released. If/when a few
> remaining cleanup and polishing tasks are completed...
>
> The current master branch *is* already fully compliant with the W3C
> SCXML 1.0 specification, including passing all the W3C (IRP) tests for
> it. At least, when using the jexl or groovy script languages.
> And the Common SCXML 2.0 engine IMO is pretty cool and convenient to
> use, for those who like/need a formalized statemachine engine.
>
> Only for the javascript language (using Java 8 Nashorn, now deprecated
> since Java 11...) there are still 3/188 W3C IRP tests failing.
> And those 3 test failures are really, really difficult to fix, because
> of limitations/quirks in the Nashorn engine itself.
> So that is where I got 'stuck'.
> I honestly lost interest and desire to try fix this, given that Nashorn
> now is deprecated in Java 11 anyway, I don't think anyone is actually
> using/waiting for the javascript language support to begin with, and so
> I rather just/simply rip out the whole javascript language support and
> be done with it.
>
> And then, there is the remaining work to:
> a) Fix/remove/replace existing documentation, which is still mostly
> based upon the last 0.9 release from more than a decade ago.
> To do this properly is/would be a major effort in itself, as the
> commons-scxml-2.0 API is really, really different now.
> b) Fix/configure the site generation itself (I'm actually clueless)
> c) Check/adjust current checkstyle and other build/release reports to be
> more in line with the common practices for Apache Commons projects?
>
> For task a) I assume I'd have to take first responsibility,
> possible/hopefully with some help from Woonsan, because 80+% of the code
> and API changes were made by me, the rest by Woonsan.
> However I honestly don't have the cycles to do this properly right now.
> But if it is acceptable to only do the bare minimum, and at least remove
> the out-of-date examples and just have a basic/minimal 'getting
> started' page, I could pull that off in a few weeks time.
>
> For task b) I assume other devs may be able to help out a bit: I just
> needs some explanation and clarification how this (now) is supposed to
> work.
>
> Lastly, for task c) I don't know what the current/common policy is or
> should be: the only thing I realized is that the current reporting
> configuration is extremely old (10+ years) and might need adjusting.
> I guess this is also something other Commons devs might be able to
> explain or even help out with?
>
> Looking forward to further input, and hopefully some offered help,
> because I really would like to wrap this up, sometime soon.
>
> Regards,
> Ate
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@commons.apache.org
>
>