+1!!

--
Ricardo Zanini Fernandes



On Wed, Oct 25, 2023 at 2:09 PM Eder Ignatowicz <[email protected]>
wrote:

> +1 for that Pere.
>
> A couple of weeks ago, Paulo already started to move some packages from
> apps to KIE tools exactly due to that.
>
> He will be back next week and I'll ask him to share more details here.
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 25, 2023 at 1:00 PM Alex Porcelli <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > +1 for the move!
> >
> > this goes in the right direction, to simplify CI and inter dependencies
> we
> > have today.
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 25, 2023 at 12:54 PM Pere Fernandez (apache) <
> > [email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > Hello folks,
> > >
> > > As you may know, the "kogito-apps" repo contains a set of frontend
> > packages
> > > inside of the "ui-packages" module.  Those packages are used to build
> the
> > > runtime consoles webapps (task/management console) and the Quarkus
> > dev-ui's
> > > extensions webapps. The situation is that these "ui-packages" depend on
> > > some "kie-tools" components and APIs, which is bringing two problems:
> > >
> > > First is that it is hard to keep them updated with the latest changes
> in
> > > "kie-tools". Usually the newer versions of "kie-tools" have new
> features,
> > > fixes (specially security fixes) that are needed in "kogito-apps". So
> we
> > > must wait for a "kie-tools" release to have them available while if
> they
> > > were part of the same repo we'll have them immediately in the consoles
> > for
> > > free.
> > >
> > > Second, is the annoying circular dependency between "kie-tools" and
> > > "kogito-apps" because of the "jit-executor"...
> > >
> > > I think that these issues could be resolved if we move the ui-packages
> > into
> > > "kie-tools", which looks like a more natural place for them than
> > > "kogito-apps".
> > >
> > > I know that this topic was already discussed some time ago, but I think
> > now
> > > would be a good moment to consider tackling it.  So before making any
> > > official proposal I'd like to ask how you feel about it?
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > >
> > >  Pere
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to