You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@sling.apache.org by Ian Boston <ie...@tfd.co.uk> on 2017/10/13 09:51:31 UTC
Upgrade to Oak 1.7.9
Hi,
I would like to upgrade Sling to depend on Oak 1.7.9 as it was just
released. The patch be the same as [1] with 1.7.8 replaced by 1.7.9.
Any objections ?
Best Regards
Ian
1 https://github.com/apache/sling/compare/trunk...ieb:
upgradeToOak178?expand=1
Re: Upgrade to Oak 1.7.9
Posted by Oliver Lietz <ap...@oliverlietz.de>.
On Friday 13 October 2017 14:17:03 Ian Boston wrote:
> Hi,
Hi Ian,
> On 13 October 2017 at 13:24, Oliver Lietz <ap...@oliverlietz.de> wrote:
> > On Friday 13 October 2017 10:51:31 Ian Boston wrote:
> > > Hi,
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > > I would like to upgrade Sling to depend on Oak 1.7.9 as it was just
> > > released. The patch be the same as [1] with 1.7.8 replaced by 1.7.9.
> > >
> > > Any objections ?
> >
> > I prefer sticking to stable and wait for 1.8.0.
>
> Is that a strong preference ?
yes, very strong. I hadn't the time to argue today, but Julian explained it
well in the other thread (though I don't see how branching could help in
general* as we are not able to cut releases anyway).
> Not upgrading blocks the availability of OAK-6575 until 1.8.0 is released,
> which creates delays in that feature being available downstream.
[*] You can create private releases of course (which Adobe did in the past
already, not recommended).
Regards,
O.
> Best Regards
> Ian
>
> > Regards,
> > O.
> >
> > > Best Regards
> > > Ian
> > >
> > > 1 https://github.com/apache/sling/compare/trunk...ieb:
> > > upgradeToOak178?expand=1
Re: Upgrade to Oak 1.7.9
Posted by Ian Boston <ie...@tfd.co.uk>.
Hi,
On 13 October 2017 at 13:24, Oliver Lietz <ap...@oliverlietz.de> wrote:
> On Friday 13 October 2017 10:51:31 Ian Boston wrote:
> > Hi,
>
> Hi,
>
> > I would like to upgrade Sling to depend on Oak 1.7.9 as it was just
> > released. The patch be the same as [1] with 1.7.8 replaced by 1.7.9.
> >
> > Any objections ?
>
> I prefer sticking to stable and wait for 1.8.0.
>
Is that a strong preference ?
Not upgrading blocks the availability of OAK-6575 until 1.8.0 is released,
which creates delays in that feature being available downstream.
Best Regards
Ian
>
> Regards,
> O.
>
> > Best Regards
> > Ian
> >
> > 1 https://github.com/apache/sling/compare/trunk...ieb:
> > upgradeToOak178?expand=1
>
>
Re: Upgrade to Oak 1.7.9
Posted by Oliver Lietz <ap...@oliverlietz.de>.
On Friday 13 October 2017 10:51:31 Ian Boston wrote:
> Hi,
Hi,
> I would like to upgrade Sling to depend on Oak 1.7.9 as it was just
> released. The patch be the same as [1] with 1.7.8 replaced by 1.7.9.
>
> Any objections ?
I prefer sticking to stable and wait for 1.8.0.
Regards,
O.
> Best Regards
> Ian
>
> 1 https://github.com/apache/sling/compare/trunk...ieb:
> upgradeToOak178?expand=1
Re: Upgrade to Oak 1.7.9
Posted by Ian Boston <ie...@tfd.co.uk>.
Hi,
Please ignore this thread now. Upgrading to 1.7.9 is not safe.
Oak 1.7.9 is not stable or close to 1.8 and the Oak team has indicated
there will be more changes before 1.8 potentially to exported packages. In
fact, so many that a discussion thread for Oak 2.0 thread was just started
on oak-dev.
Best Regards
Ian
On 13 October 2017 at 14:26, Ian Boston <ie...@tfd.co.uk> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 13 October 2017 at 13:25, Oliver Lietz <ap...@oliverlietz.de> wrote:
>
>> On Friday 13 October 2017 13:00:53 Ian Boston wrote:
>> > On 13 October 2017 at 11:16, Robert Munteanu <ro...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>> > > Hi Ian,
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> > > On Fri, 2017-10-13 at 10:51 +0100, Ian Boston wrote:
>> > > > Hi,
>> > > > I would like to upgrade Sling to depend on Oak 1.7.9 as it was just
>> > > > released. The patch be the same as [1] with 1.7.8 replaced by 1.7.9.
>> > > >
>> > > > Any objections ?
>> > >
>> > > No objections here.
>> > >
>> > > Related to the pull request - is it required for bundles consuming
>> > > testing.paxexam to bump up their dependency version?
>> >
>> > If those bundles want to perform integration tests on Oak 1.7.9 then
>> they
>> > need to bump the dependency.
>> > Some do, some dont, so I bumped all to make certain all would still
>> build
>> > on Oak 1.7.9.
>> >
>> > The first one that needs to do a release, will have to release paxexam
>> at
>> > the same time... and fix the references to the 0.0.5-SNAPSHOT version.
>> >
>> > I assume that was done before since all were on 0.0.4.
>>
>> no need for a new release of Testing PaxExam (but will do a release soon
>> anyway), you can override the version for Oak with the one from POM (was
>> done
>> in the past e.g. for Oak Server):
>>
>
>
> Between Oak 1.6.5 and Oak 1.7.9 there has been a modularisation effort.
> Whereas selecting a version of Oak prior to 1.7.9 was a simple task of
> changing a single oak-core version number (actually 2 since Jackrabbit API
> is versioned with Oak releases), between 1.7.9 and later there are 6
> additional bundles. It is true I could have done that in oak-server,
> however that wouldn't be appropriate for other bundles, some of which
> broke.
>
> Not building with ITs having Oak 1.7.9 or later for every bundle risks
> releasing a Sling bundle that wont work with that version of the Oak
> server. So far I have not seen a breakage of that nature, but that is no
> longer an unknown risk.
>
> I hope that makes sense and is clear from the patch itself.
>
> Best Regards
> Ian
>
>
>>
>> https://github.com/apache/sling/tree/trunk/testing/org.apach
>> e.sling.testing.paxexam
>>
>> Regards,
>> O.
>>
>> > Best Regards
>> > Ian
>> >
>> > > I think they can
>> > > run their tests just fine on the old dependencies and in case of a
>> > > release of that module we don't need to wait for a release of
>> > > testing.paxexam.
>> > >
>> > > I'm looking at
>> > >
>> > > - bundles/commons/contentdetection
>> > > - bundles/commons/metrics
>> > > - bundles/extensions/org.apache.sling.resource.presence
>> > > - bundles/scripting/core
>> > > - contrib/extensions/rewriter
>> > > - contrib/extensions/sling
>> > > - contrib/scripting/freemarker
>> > > - contrib/scripting/org.apache.sling.scripting.thymeleaf
>> > >
>> > > Thanks,
>> > >
>> > > Robert
>>
>>
>>
>
Re: Upgrade to Oak 1.7.9
Posted by Ian Boston <ie...@tfd.co.uk>.
Hi,
On 13 October 2017 at 13:25, Oliver Lietz <ap...@oliverlietz.de> wrote:
> On Friday 13 October 2017 13:00:53 Ian Boston wrote:
> > On 13 October 2017 at 11:16, Robert Munteanu <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > Hi Ian,
>
> Hi,
>
> > > On Fri, 2017-10-13 at 10:51 +0100, Ian Boston wrote:
> > > > Hi,
> > > > I would like to upgrade Sling to depend on Oak 1.7.9 as it was just
> > > > released. The patch be the same as [1] with 1.7.8 replaced by 1.7.9.
> > > >
> > > > Any objections ?
> > >
> > > No objections here.
> > >
> > > Related to the pull request - is it required for bundles consuming
> > > testing.paxexam to bump up their dependency version?
> >
> > If those bundles want to perform integration tests on Oak 1.7.9 then they
> > need to bump the dependency.
> > Some do, some dont, so I bumped all to make certain all would still build
> > on Oak 1.7.9.
> >
> > The first one that needs to do a release, will have to release paxexam at
> > the same time... and fix the references to the 0.0.5-SNAPSHOT version.
> >
> > I assume that was done before since all were on 0.0.4.
>
> no need for a new release of Testing PaxExam (but will do a release soon
> anyway), you can override the version for Oak with the one from POM (was
> done
> in the past e.g. for Oak Server):
>
Between Oak 1.6.5 and Oak 1.7.9 there has been a modularisation effort.
Whereas selecting a version of Oak prior to 1.7.9 was a simple task of
changing a single oak-core version number (actually 2 since Jackrabbit API
is versioned with Oak releases), between 1.7.9 and later there are 6
additional bundles. It is true I could have done that in oak-server,
however that wouldn't be appropriate for other bundles, some of which
broke.
Not building with ITs having Oak 1.7.9 or later for every bundle risks
releasing a Sling bundle that wont work with that version of the Oak
server. So far I have not seen a breakage of that nature, but that is no
longer an unknown risk.
I hope that makes sense and is clear from the patch itself.
Best Regards
Ian
>
> https://github.com/apache/sling/tree/trunk/testing/org.
> apache.sling.testing.paxexam
>
> Regards,
> O.
>
> > Best Regards
> > Ian
> >
> > > I think they can
> > > run their tests just fine on the old dependencies and in case of a
> > > release of that module we don't need to wait for a release of
> > > testing.paxexam.
> > >
> > > I'm looking at
> > >
> > > - bundles/commons/contentdetection
> > > - bundles/commons/metrics
> > > - bundles/extensions/org.apache.sling.resource.presence
> > > - bundles/scripting/core
> > > - contrib/extensions/rewriter
> > > - contrib/extensions/sling
> > > - contrib/scripting/freemarker
> > > - contrib/scripting/org.apache.sling.scripting.thymeleaf
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Robert
>
>
>
Re: Upgrade to Oak 1.7.9
Posted by Oliver Lietz <ap...@oliverlietz.de>.
On Friday 13 October 2017 13:00:53 Ian Boston wrote:
> On 13 October 2017 at 11:16, Robert Munteanu <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> > Hi Ian,
Hi,
> > On Fri, 2017-10-13 at 10:51 +0100, Ian Boston wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > > I would like to upgrade Sling to depend on Oak 1.7.9 as it was just
> > > released. The patch be the same as [1] with 1.7.8 replaced by 1.7.9.
> > >
> > > Any objections ?
> >
> > No objections here.
> >
> > Related to the pull request - is it required for bundles consuming
> > testing.paxexam to bump up their dependency version?
>
> If those bundles want to perform integration tests on Oak 1.7.9 then they
> need to bump the dependency.
> Some do, some dont, so I bumped all to make certain all would still build
> on Oak 1.7.9.
>
> The first one that needs to do a release, will have to release paxexam at
> the same time... and fix the references to the 0.0.5-SNAPSHOT version.
>
> I assume that was done before since all were on 0.0.4.
no need for a new release of Testing PaxExam (but will do a release soon
anyway), you can override the version for Oak with the one from POM (was done
in the past e.g. for Oak Server):
https://github.com/apache/sling/tree/trunk/testing/org.apache.sling.testing.paxexam
Regards,
O.
> Best Regards
> Ian
>
> > I think they can
> > run their tests just fine on the old dependencies and in case of a
> > release of that module we don't need to wait for a release of
> > testing.paxexam.
> >
> > I'm looking at
> >
> > - bundles/commons/contentdetection
> > - bundles/commons/metrics
> > - bundles/extensions/org.apache.sling.resource.presence
> > - bundles/scripting/core
> > - contrib/extensions/rewriter
> > - contrib/extensions/sling
> > - contrib/scripting/freemarker
> > - contrib/scripting/org.apache.sling.scripting.thymeleaf
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Robert
Re: Upgrade to Oak 1.7.9
Posted by Ian Boston <ie...@tfd.co.uk>.
On 13 October 2017 at 11:16, Robert Munteanu <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi Ian,
>
> On Fri, 2017-10-13 at 10:51 +0100, Ian Boston wrote:
> > Hi,
> > I would like to upgrade Sling to depend on Oak 1.7.9 as it was just
> > released. The patch be the same as [1] with 1.7.8 replaced by 1.7.9.
> >
> > Any objections ?
>
> No objections here.
>
> Related to the pull request - is it required for bundles consuming
> testing.paxexam to bump up their dependency version?
If those bundles want to perform integration tests on Oak 1.7.9 then they
need to bump the dependency.
Some do, some dont, so I bumped all to make certain all would still build
on Oak 1.7.9.
The first one that needs to do a release, will have to release paxexam at
the same time... and fix the references to the 0.0.5-SNAPSHOT version.
I assume that was done before since all were on 0.0.4.
Best Regards
Ian
> I think they can
> run their tests just fine on the old dependencies and in case of a
> release of that module we don't need to wait for a release of
> testing.paxexam.
>
> I'm looking at
>
> - bundles/commons/contentdetection
> - bundles/commons/metrics
> - bundles/extensions/org.apache.sling.resource.presence
> - bundles/scripting/core
> - contrib/extensions/rewriter
> - contrib/extensions/sling
> - contrib/scripting/freemarker
> - contrib/scripting/org.apache.sling.scripting.thymeleaf
>
> Thanks,
>
> Robert
>
Re: Upgrade to Oak 1.7.9
Posted by Robert Munteanu <ro...@apache.org>.
Hi Ian,
On Fri, 2017-10-13 at 10:51 +0100, Ian Boston wrote:
> Hi,
> I would like to upgrade Sling to depend on Oak 1.7.9 as it was just
> released. The patch be the same as [1] with 1.7.8 replaced by 1.7.9.
>
> Any objections ?
No objections here.
Related to the pull request - is it required for bundles consuming
testing.paxexam to bump up their dependency version? I think they can
run their tests just fine on the old dependencies and in case of a
release of that module we don't need to wait for a release of
testing.paxexam.
I'm looking at
- bundles/commons/contentdetection
- bundles/commons/metrics
- bundles/extensions/org.apache.sling.resource.presence
- bundles/scripting/core
- contrib/extensions/rewriter
- contrib/extensions/sling
- contrib/scripting/freemarker
- contrib/scripting/org.apache.sling.scripting.thymeleaf
Thanks,
Robert