You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@grails.apache.org by James Daugherty <jd...@apache.org> on 2026/08/16 14:47:04 UTC
[VOTE] Merge grails-quartz into grails-core repository
Per https://lists.apache.org/thread/jj2npk1mnm4wynx8y8l3o7yz4hvfbf7v ,
I propose we merge grails-quartz
(https://github.com/apache/grails-quartz) into grails-core
(https://github.com/apache/grails-core).
Please vote:
+1 yes
+0 abstain
-1 no (explain)
My vote:
+1 (binding)
Re: [VOTE] Merge grails-quartz into grails-core repository
Posted by Scott Murphy Heiberg <sc...@apache.org>.
Changed to +1 after discussion in weekly meeting
On 2026/08/18 19:14:30 Scott Murphy Heiberg wrote:
> -1
>
> 1. Every time we add to grails-core, it makes the entire build process slower and more flaky. I have yet to create a single PR that resulted in a stable build even though it ran locally on my machine. I have wasted hours and hours of my time going through very long stack traces that are just the result of a flaky build. Then re-running the build and having to wait hours just to find out there was nothing wrong with the tests in the first place? We need to stabilize the build process before adding anything more to it.
>
> 2. Is grails-quartz an integral part of grails-core? I would argue no. I would even argue there are better modern alternatives than quartz. This goes against the principle of SOC and just continues to grow a repo that is already struggling to maintain control. Is this repo currently subjected to Apache rules? If not, should it be or is it better to keep it free and independent?
>
> 3. Probably most important, PRs now go for weeks on grails-core without reviews. Adding another repo and subjecting it to a more stringent approval process is a step backwards for the quartz plugin itself. Currently grails-core has 78 PRs spanning several months https://github.com/apache/grails-core/pulls Anyone voting to add more projects to grails-core, should first consider reviewing the 78 PRs we currently have open.
>
> 4. If I run a full sweep build on my MacBook M4 MAX, it frequently overheats and crashes my laptop to the point I have to force restart it. Adding more to the build is just going to make it worse and add more to github actions that currently take ~6 hours to get green.
>
> 5. There are tests and components in grails-core/ currently that don't even build, are unused, and completely broken. We should focus on cleaning up or fixing all the dead code. My fear is this will just add to that in the long term.
>
> In summary, I would be +1 if
> 1. GitHub actions were stabilized and build actually worked
> 2. GitHub actions could be completed in 1 hour or less.
> 3. Outstanding PRs were actively reviewed or rejected.
>
> On 2026/08/16 14:47:04 James Daugherty wrote:
> > Per https://lists.apache.org/thread/jj2npk1mnm4wynx8y8l3o7yz4hvfbf7v ,
> > I propose we merge grails-quartz
> > (https://github.com/apache/grails-quartz) into grails-core
> > (https://github.com/apache/grails-core).
> >
> > Please vote:
> >
> > +1 yes
> > +0 abstain
> > -1 no (explain)
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] Merge grails-quartz into grails-core repository
Posted by James Fredley <ja...@apache.org>.
I have felt Scott's pain for the last 12-18 months. That said I do not think adding grails-quartz to the mono repo changes the equation meaningfully and I am still a +1 on merging it in.
Fixing the slowness will require several optimizations in Gradle and Geb:
https://github.com/apache/grails-core/pull/16158 - which was approved and I just merged, is HUGE - if someone has time, this could also be backported to 7.x.x likely in part.
These might also help the time to build, they are drafts, so just a starting point
https://github.com/apache/grails-core/pull/16167
https://github.com/apache/grails-core/pull/16168
And on GEB, this is a start to the architecture fix:
https://github.com/apache/groovy-geb/pull/330
James
On 2026/08/19 16:41:05 Scott Murphy Heiberg wrote:
> Ok, then I better see the argument for the merge, but...
>
> Why not move it out of apache then? Is that possible?
>
> Otherwise we are adding 30 issues and 1 PR to the already 812 open issues in grails-core
>
>
> On 2026/08/19 07:01:09 Mattias Reichel wrote:
> > > Is this repo currently subjected to Apache rules?
> >
> > Yes, the grails-quartz plugin is already an Apache project.
> > It is also the last outstanding Grails plugin that was brought over to
> > Apache that has not been incorporated into the grails-core monorepo.
> >
> > Scott, I share your concern about the size of grails-core (and have
> > for every new inclusion).
> > However since this is the last separate Apache plugin, I think we
> > should just add it and reap the benefits of having it added.
> > It's not a big addition, like spring-security was.
> >
> > +1 (binding)
> >
> > Den tis 18 aug. 2026 kl 21:14 skrev Scott Murphy Heiberg
> > <sc...@apache.org>:
> > >
> > > -1
> > >
> > > 1. Every time we add to grails-core, it makes the entire build process slower and more flaky. I have yet to create a single PR that resulted in a stable build even though it ran locally on my machine. I have wasted hours and hours of my time going through very long stack traces that are just the result of a flaky build. Then re-running the build and having to wait hours just to find out there was nothing wrong with the tests in the first place? We need to stabilize the build process before adding anything more to it.
> > >
> > > 2. Is grails-quartz an integral part of grails-core? I would argue no. I would even argue there are better modern alternatives than quartz. This goes against the principle of SOC and just continues to grow a repo that is already struggling to maintain control. Is this repo currently subjected to Apache rules? If not, should it be or is it better to keep it free and independent?
> > >
> > > 3. Probably most important, PRs now go for weeks on grails-core without reviews. Adding another repo and subjecting it to a more stringent approval process is a step backwards for the quartz plugin itself. Currently grails-core has 78 PRs spanning several months https://github.com/apache/grails-core/pulls Anyone voting to add more projects to grails-core, should first consider reviewing the 78 PRs we currently have open.
> > >
> > > 4. If I run a full sweep build on my MacBook M4 MAX, it frequently overheats and crashes my laptop to the point I have to force restart it. Adding more to the build is just going to make it worse and add more to github actions that currently take ~6 hours to get green.
> > >
> > > 5. There are tests and components in grails-core/ currently that don't even build, are unused, and completely broken. We should focus on cleaning up or fixing all the dead code. My fear is this will just add to that in the long term.
> > >
> > > In summary, I would be +1 if
> > > 1. GitHub actions were stabilized and build actually worked
> > > 2. GitHub actions could be completed in 1 hour or less.
> > > 3. Outstanding PRs were actively reviewed or rejected.
> > >
> > > On 2026/08/16 14:47:04 James Daugherty wrote:
> > > > Per https://lists.apache.org/thread/jj2npk1mnm4wynx8y8l3o7yz4hvfbf7v ,
> > > > I propose we merge grails-quartz
> > > > (https://github.com/apache/grails-quartz) into grails-core
> > > > (https://github.com/apache/grails-core).
> > > >
> > > > Please vote:
> > > >
> > > > +1 yes
> > > > +0 abstain
> > > > -1 no (explain)
> > > >
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] Merge grails-quartz into grails-core repository
Posted by Scott Murphy Heiberg <sc...@apache.org>.
Ok, then I better see the argument for the merge, but...
Why not move it out of apache then? Is that possible?
Otherwise we are adding 30 issues and 1 PR to the already 812 open issues in grails-core
On 2026/08/19 07:01:09 Mattias Reichel wrote:
> > Is this repo currently subjected to Apache rules?
>
> Yes, the grails-quartz plugin is already an Apache project.
> It is also the last outstanding Grails plugin that was brought over to
> Apache that has not been incorporated into the grails-core monorepo.
>
> Scott, I share your concern about the size of grails-core (and have
> for every new inclusion).
> However since this is the last separate Apache plugin, I think we
> should just add it and reap the benefits of having it added.
> It's not a big addition, like spring-security was.
>
> +1 (binding)
>
> Den tis 18 aug. 2026 kl 21:14 skrev Scott Murphy Heiberg
> <sc...@apache.org>:
> >
> > -1
> >
> > 1. Every time we add to grails-core, it makes the entire build process slower and more flaky. I have yet to create a single PR that resulted in a stable build even though it ran locally on my machine. I have wasted hours and hours of my time going through very long stack traces that are just the result of a flaky build. Then re-running the build and having to wait hours just to find out there was nothing wrong with the tests in the first place? We need to stabilize the build process before adding anything more to it.
> >
> > 2. Is grails-quartz an integral part of grails-core? I would argue no. I would even argue there are better modern alternatives than quartz. This goes against the principle of SOC and just continues to grow a repo that is already struggling to maintain control. Is this repo currently subjected to Apache rules? If not, should it be or is it better to keep it free and independent?
> >
> > 3. Probably most important, PRs now go for weeks on grails-core without reviews. Adding another repo and subjecting it to a more stringent approval process is a step backwards for the quartz plugin itself. Currently grails-core has 78 PRs spanning several months https://github.com/apache/grails-core/pulls Anyone voting to add more projects to grails-core, should first consider reviewing the 78 PRs we currently have open.
> >
> > 4. If I run a full sweep build on my MacBook M4 MAX, it frequently overheats and crashes my laptop to the point I have to force restart it. Adding more to the build is just going to make it worse and add more to github actions that currently take ~6 hours to get green.
> >
> > 5. There are tests and components in grails-core/ currently that don't even build, are unused, and completely broken. We should focus on cleaning up or fixing all the dead code. My fear is this will just add to that in the long term.
> >
> > In summary, I would be +1 if
> > 1. GitHub actions were stabilized and build actually worked
> > 2. GitHub actions could be completed in 1 hour or less.
> > 3. Outstanding PRs were actively reviewed or rejected.
> >
> > On 2026/08/16 14:47:04 James Daugherty wrote:
> > > Per https://lists.apache.org/thread/jj2npk1mnm4wynx8y8l3o7yz4hvfbf7v ,
> > > I propose we merge grails-quartz
> > > (https://github.com/apache/grails-quartz) into grails-core
> > > (https://github.com/apache/grails-core).
> > >
> > > Please vote:
> > >
> > > +1 yes
> > > +0 abstain
> > > -1 no (explain)
> > >
>
Re: [VOTE] Merge grails-quartz into grails-core repository
Posted by Søren Berg Glasius <so...@glasius.dk>.
There is an alternative to apache/grails-quartz, and that's
grails-plugins/grails-quartz - that would free the plugin of the Apache
release cycle. (Don't know what the rules are for moving out of Apache?)
Den ons. 19. aug. 2026 kl. 09.01 skrev Mattias Reichel <ma...@apache.org>:
> > Is this repo currently subjected to Apache rules?
>
> Yes, the grails-quartz plugin is already an Apache project.
> It is also the last outstanding Grails plugin that was brought over to
> Apache that has not been incorporated into the grails-core monorepo.
>
> Scott, I share your concern about the size of grails-core (and have
> for every new inclusion).
> However since this is the last separate Apache plugin, I think we
> should just add it and reap the benefits of having it added.
> It's not a big addition, like spring-security was.
>
> +1 (binding)
>
> Den tis 18 aug. 2026 kl 21:14 skrev Scott Murphy Heiberg
> <sc...@apache.org>:
> >
> > -1
> >
> > 1. Every time we add to grails-core, it makes the entire build process
> slower and more flaky. I have yet to create a single PR that resulted in a
> stable build even though it ran locally on my machine. I have wasted
> hours and hours of my time going through very long stack traces that are
> just the result of a flaky build. Then re-running the build and having to
> wait hours just to find out there was nothing wrong with the tests in the
> first place? We need to stabilize the build process before adding anything
> more to it.
> >
> > 2. Is grails-quartz an integral part of grails-core? I would argue no.
> I would even argue there are better modern alternatives than quartz. This
> goes against the principle of SOC and just continues to grow a repo that is
> already struggling to maintain control. Is this repo currently subjected
> to Apache rules? If not, should it be or is it better to keep it free and
> independent?
> >
> > 3. Probably most important, PRs now go for weeks on grails-core without
> reviews. Adding another repo and subjecting it to a more stringent
> approval process is a step backwards for the quartz plugin itself.
> Currently grails-core has 78 PRs spanning several months
> https://github.com/apache/grails-core/pulls Anyone voting to add more
> projects to grails-core, should first consider reviewing the 78 PRs we
> currently have open.
> >
> > 4. If I run a full sweep build on my MacBook M4 MAX, it frequently
> overheats and crashes my laptop to the point I have to force restart it.
> Adding more to the build is just going to make it worse and add more to
> github actions that currently take ~6 hours to get green.
> >
> > 5. There are tests and components in grails-core/ currently that don't
> even build, are unused, and completely broken. We should focus on cleaning
> up or fixing all the dead code. My fear is this will just add to that in
> the long term.
> >
> > In summary, I would be +1 if
> > 1. GitHub actions were stabilized and build actually worked
> > 2. GitHub actions could be completed in 1 hour or less.
> > 3. Outstanding PRs were actively reviewed or rejected.
> >
> > On 2026/08/16 14:47:04 James Daugherty wrote:
> > > Per https://lists.apache.org/thread/jj2npk1mnm4wynx8y8l3o7yz4hvfbf7v ,
> > > I propose we merge grails-quartz
> > > (https://github.com/apache/grails-quartz) into grails-core
> > > (https://github.com/apache/grails-core).
> > >
> > > Please vote:
> > >
> > > +1 yes
> > > +0 abstain
> > > -1 no (explain)
> > >
>
Re: [VOTE] Merge grails-quartz into grails-core repository
Posted by Mattias Reichel <ma...@apache.org>.
> Is this repo currently subjected to Apache rules?
Yes, the grails-quartz plugin is already an Apache project.
It is also the last outstanding Grails plugin that was brought over to
Apache that has not been incorporated into the grails-core monorepo.
Scott, I share your concern about the size of grails-core (and have
for every new inclusion).
However since this is the last separate Apache plugin, I think we
should just add it and reap the benefits of having it added.
It's not a big addition, like spring-security was.
+1 (binding)
Den tis 18 aug. 2026 kl 21:14 skrev Scott Murphy Heiberg
<sc...@apache.org>:
>
> -1
>
> 1. Every time we add to grails-core, it makes the entire build process slower and more flaky. I have yet to create a single PR that resulted in a stable build even though it ran locally on my machine. I have wasted hours and hours of my time going through very long stack traces that are just the result of a flaky build. Then re-running the build and having to wait hours just to find out there was nothing wrong with the tests in the first place? We need to stabilize the build process before adding anything more to it.
>
> 2. Is grails-quartz an integral part of grails-core? I would argue no. I would even argue there are better modern alternatives than quartz. This goes against the principle of SOC and just continues to grow a repo that is already struggling to maintain control. Is this repo currently subjected to Apache rules? If not, should it be or is it better to keep it free and independent?
>
> 3. Probably most important, PRs now go for weeks on grails-core without reviews. Adding another repo and subjecting it to a more stringent approval process is a step backwards for the quartz plugin itself. Currently grails-core has 78 PRs spanning several months https://github.com/apache/grails-core/pulls Anyone voting to add more projects to grails-core, should first consider reviewing the 78 PRs we currently have open.
>
> 4. If I run a full sweep build on my MacBook M4 MAX, it frequently overheats and crashes my laptop to the point I have to force restart it. Adding more to the build is just going to make it worse and add more to github actions that currently take ~6 hours to get green.
>
> 5. There are tests and components in grails-core/ currently that don't even build, are unused, and completely broken. We should focus on cleaning up or fixing all the dead code. My fear is this will just add to that in the long term.
>
> In summary, I would be +1 if
> 1. GitHub actions were stabilized and build actually worked
> 2. GitHub actions could be completed in 1 hour or less.
> 3. Outstanding PRs were actively reviewed or rejected.
>
> On 2026/08/16 14:47:04 James Daugherty wrote:
> > Per https://lists.apache.org/thread/jj2npk1mnm4wynx8y8l3o7yz4hvfbf7v ,
> > I propose we merge grails-quartz
> > (https://github.com/apache/grails-quartz) into grails-core
> > (https://github.com/apache/grails-core).
> >
> > Please vote:
> >
> > +1 yes
> > +0 abstain
> > -1 no (explain)
> >
Re: [VOTE] Merge grails-quartz into grails-core repository
Posted by Scott Murphy Heiberg <sc...@apache.org>.
-1
1. Every time we add to grails-core, it makes the entire build process slower and more flaky. I have yet to create a single PR that resulted in a stable build even though it ran locally on my machine. I have wasted hours and hours of my time going through very long stack traces that are just the result of a flaky build. Then re-running the build and having to wait hours just to find out there was nothing wrong with the tests in the first place? We need to stabilize the build process before adding anything more to it.
2. Is grails-quartz an integral part of grails-core? I would argue no. I would even argue there are better modern alternatives than quartz. This goes against the principle of SOC and just continues to grow a repo that is already struggling to maintain control. Is this repo currently subjected to Apache rules? If not, should it be or is it better to keep it free and independent?
3. Probably most important, PRs now go for weeks on grails-core without reviews. Adding another repo and subjecting it to a more stringent approval process is a step backwards for the quartz plugin itself. Currently grails-core has 78 PRs spanning several months https://github.com/apache/grails-core/pulls Anyone voting to add more projects to grails-core, should first consider reviewing the 78 PRs we currently have open.
4. If I run a full sweep build on my MacBook M4 MAX, it frequently overheats and crashes my laptop to the point I have to force restart it. Adding more to the build is just going to make it worse and add more to github actions that currently take ~6 hours to get green.
5. There are tests and components in grails-core/ currently that don't even build, are unused, and completely broken. We should focus on cleaning up or fixing all the dead code. My fear is this will just add to that in the long term.
In summary, I would be +1 if
1. GitHub actions were stabilized and build actually worked
2. GitHub actions could be completed in 1 hour or less.
3. Outstanding PRs were actively reviewed or rejected.
On 2026/08/16 14:47:04 James Daugherty wrote:
> Per https://lists.apache.org/thread/jj2npk1mnm4wynx8y8l3o7yz4hvfbf7v ,
> I propose we merge grails-quartz
> (https://github.com/apache/grails-quartz) into grails-core
> (https://github.com/apache/grails-core).
>
> Please vote:
>
> +1 yes
> +0 abstain
> -1 no (explain)
>
Re: [VOTE] Merge grails-quartz into grails-core repository
Posted by Søren Berg Glasius <so...@glasius.dk>.
+1 (binding)
Den søn. 16. aug. 2026 kl. 16.47 skrev James Daugherty <
jdaugherty@apache.org>:
> Per https://lists.apache.org/thread/jj2npk1mnm4wynx8y8l3o7yz4hvfbf7v ,
> I propose we merge grails-quartz
> (https://github.com/apache/grails-quartz) into grails-core
> (https://github.com/apache/grails-core).
>
> Please vote:
>
> +1 yes
> +0 abstain
> -1 no (explain)
>
> My vote:
>
> +1 (binding)
>
Re: [VOTE] Merge grails-quartz into grails-core repository
Posted by Thomas Rasmussen <tb...@apache.org>.
+1 (binding)
On Sun, Aug 16, 2026 at 5:02 PM Gianluca Sartori <g....@gmail.com>
wrote:
> +1
>
>
> Gianluca Sartori
> --
> https://dueuno.com
>
> On Sun, 16 Aug 2026 at 16:47, James Daugherty <jd...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > Per https://lists.apache.org/thread/jj2npk1mnm4wynx8y8l3o7yz4hvfbf7v ,
> > I propose we merge grails-quartz
> > (https://github.com/apache/grails-quartz) into grails-core
> > (https://github.com/apache/grails-core).
> >
> > Please vote:
> >
> > +1 yes
> > +0 abstain
> > -1 no (explain)
> >
> > My vote:
> >
> > +1 (binding)
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] Merge grails-quartz into grails-core repository
Posted by Gianluca Sartori <g....@gmail.com>.
+1
Gianluca Sartori
--
https://dueuno.com
On Sun, 16 Aug 2026 at 16:47, James Daugherty <jd...@apache.org> wrote:
> Per https://lists.apache.org/thread/jj2npk1mnm4wynx8y8l3o7yz4hvfbf7v ,
> I propose we merge grails-quartz
> (https://github.com/apache/grails-quartz) into grails-core
> (https://github.com/apache/grails-core).
>
> Please vote:
>
> +1 yes
> +0 abstain
> -1 no (explain)
>
> My vote:
>
> +1 (binding)
>