| Re: [glassfish-dev] GlassFish 7 plans? |
Hi,
We can still do PRs and ask for a review for certain things, but it's good to be able to merge by lazy consensus.
Reviews are a double edged sword. They can help, but PRs requiring reviews can pile up and stop people in their tracks because new work would depend on them. Doing PRs based on PRs is kinda a workaround for that, but it's not always nice either.
I'm not so afraid in things becoming opaque, as the commits are still clearly visible to everyone.
For now though, I'll prepare an initial PR for 7.0 at least.
Kind regards,Arjan
On Tue, Aug 31, 2021 at 1:53 PM Steve Millidge (Payara) <steve.millidge@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
_______________________________________________So it's just about avoiding PR reviews?Do you want PRs? There's no point in a PR without a review, may as well push commits directly to the branch or master?If that's how people wish to develop then we can apply to have branch protection for master switched off?
The danger is that progress and status of the branch becomes opaque to others.
Steve
From: glassfish-dev <glassfish-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of arjan tijms <arjan.tijms@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: 31 August 2021 12:35 PM
To: glassfish developer discussions <glassfish-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [glassfish-dev] GlassFish 7 plans?Hi,
On Tuesday, August 31, 2021, Steve Millidge (Payara) <steve.millidge@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I would rather develop 7.0 on master. Why develop on a different branch?
Master needs reviews for everything. I’m not bothered too much with developing in master itself, but from experience with similar operations in the past I remember those reviews being a bit useless and time consuming at such early point.
Kind regards,Arjan
From: glassfish-dev <glassfish-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of arjan tijms <arjan.tijms@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: 31 August 2021 10:47 AM
To: glassfish developer discussions <glassfish-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [glassfish-dev] GlassFish 7 plans?Hi,
Since GlassFish 7 will initially be more in flux and have more commits that may not be entirely stable, I think it will be best to create a branch for 7.0 first and do some of the experimental development there.
Once we have a reasonable level of stability, we can switch master over to 7, hopefully quite soon.
Kind regards,Arjan
On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 1:49 PM arjan tijms <arjan.tijms@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi,
I was indeed planning to do this a while back (wrote about that intention to this list), but there weren't that many jars and implementations available to actually do anything.
There is now more available, so I'd like to take a look again at this soon.
At least milestones for Faces 4 (Mojarra 4) and Weld 4 are available if I'm not mistaken. We (Faces team) also like to release an M2 soon. I'll discuss in the Servlet team to have a milestone release done (I can do the actual work for that myself, but would need some agreement of course).
Are there any other components and/or API jars available already?
Kind regards,Arjan
On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 1:08 AM Ed Bratt <ed.bratt@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi,
I'm wondering if anyone is looking at production of GlassFish 7 -- to
align with Jakarta EE 10. Is that something the group has interest in
providing on the EE 10 release timeline? Is there a need, or is anyone
tracking component spec. and implementation team development with
respect to GlassFish picking up implementations or APIs (inbound
dependencies, I guess), or have they established dependencies for this
(outbound dependencies)?
Thanks,
-- Ed
_______________________________________________
glassfish-dev mailing list
glassfish-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/glassfish-dev
glassfish-dev mailing list
glassfish-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/glassfish-dev
_______________________________________________ glassfish-dev mailing list glassfish-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/glassfish-dev