答复: next releases

Hi Paul, OK. I understand others’s fears ?? Maybe releasing 3.0.0-ea and 2.5.0-beta together suggested by Andres is feasible. Cheers, Daniel.Sun 发件人: paulk_asert [via Groovy] 发送时间: 2017年1月18日 6:42 收件人: Daniel Sun

答复: next releases

Hi Thibault, The new parser Parrot passes all test cases of Apache Groovy project(including shouldFail test cases), and the AST generated by Parrot is identical to the AST generated by the old one except for the AST node position(Parrot provides more accurate position information). If we

Re: next releases

Alternatively, groovy-antlr4 could be a separate jar. If I understand correctly, then we are very confident that the new parser accepts all programs that the old parser accepted, because that is easy to test. But we do not know if it rejects all programs that the old parser rejected, because that

Re: next releases

Hi Daniel, Other comments have kind of superseded this one. The only thing I'll add is that I am not averse to finding a way to let 2.5 users try the new parser somehow - but as Cédric said, not at the expensive of overcomplicating our normal release. Cheers, Paul. On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 6:48

Re: next releases

On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 1:04 AM, Cédric Champeau wrote: > My take is simpler than this. If Parrot should be included in 2.5, then > remove the old parser and use it. If it's for 3.0, then it should not belong > to the 2.5 beta, or it should be an external dependency (possibly tested by > adding a

Re: next releases

On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 6:09 PM, Paul King wrote: > I am thinking we should do a 2.5.0-beta-1 release and possibly a 2.4.9 > in a couple of weeks time. For 2.5.0-beta-1, it would be nice to have > the groovy macro PR reviewed and added (I know several of us have a > review on our TODO lists) but I

Re: next releases

On 17.01.2017 16:30, John Wagenleitner wrote: On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 1:55 AM, Daniel Sun mailto:realblue...@hotmail.com>> wrote: Hi Andres, > I'd suggest to release 2.5.0-beta and 3.0-ea together. Just like the JDK > team has been posting JDK9 EA releases, we could do the same.

Re: next releases

On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 1:55 AM, Daniel Sun wrote: > Hi Andres, > > > I'd suggest to release 2.5.0-beta and 3.0-ea together. Just like the JDK > > team has been posting JDK9 EA releases, we could do the same. We know for > > a fact we're going to break things, so let's make sure the public has >

Re: next releases

Hi Andres, > I'd suggest to release 2.5.0-beta and 3.0-ea together. Just like the JDK > team has been posting JDK9 EA releases, we could do the same. We know for > a fact we're going to break things, so let's make sure the public has > ample time to test out the changes. I like your idea :)

Re: next releases

Hello all, Given the explanations made by Jochen and Cédric, we may be looking at the following: - 2.4.9: possible the latest release of the 2.4.x branch. Semantic versioning dictates there should be only fixes. - 2.5.x: new features and fixes. Requires old parser. No breaking changes - 3.0-ea

Re: next releases

It's not a simple decision. A beta isn't something to play with. There are users, and companies, using Groovy. You cannot simply say "this is new, let's try this". There are backwards compatibility concerns, as well as deployment issues. We agreed, a few months ago, to make 3.0 the breaking release

Re: next releases

On 17.01.2017 10:17, Russel Winder wrote: [...] The 2.5 build still creates jars and indy jars. Isn't it about time we settle this so there are only one set of jars in a build? right, we should also change to indy by default for the betas bye jochen

Re: next releases

On 17.01.2017 10:04, Cédric Champeau wrote: My take is simpler than this. If Parrot should be included in 2.5, then remove the old parser and use it. If it's for 3.0, then it should not belong to the 2.5 beta, or it should be an external dependency (possibly tested by adding a jar manually).

Re: next releases

On Tue, 2017-01-17 at 10:04 +0100, Cédric Champeau wrote: > My take is simpler than this. If Parrot should be included in 2.5, > then > remove the old parser and use it. If it's for 3.0, then it should not > belong to the 2.5 beta, or it should be an external dependency > (possibly > tested by addi

Re: next releases

My take is simpler than this. If Parrot should be included in 2.5, then remove the old parser and use it. If it's for 3.0, then it should not belong to the 2.5 beta, or it should be an external dependency (possibly tested by adding a jar manually). 2017-01-17 9:57 GMT+01:00 Søren Berg Glasius : >

Re: next releases

Can the parrot be packaged as separate jar that can be a dependency? That way it can be included at will On Tue, 17 Jan 2017 at 09:56 Guillaume Laforge wrote: > This is a beta, not the final release, though. > > On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 9:54 AM, Cédric Champeau < > cedric.champ...@gmail.com> wrot

Re: next releases

This is a beta, not the final release, though. On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 9:54 AM, Cédric Champeau wrote: > I'm reluctant on adding the experimental parser in a release. It requires > a different version of antlr, which means more dependencies than we really > need. We should keep the distribution

Re: next releases

I'm reluctant on adding the experimental parser in a release. It requires a different version of antlr, which means more dependencies than we really need. We should keep the distribution as clean as possible. Not saying that the new parser is dirty, but that the size and dependencies of the distrib

Re: next releases

It should definitely be included, so users can play with Parrot and report their findings! Guillaume On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 9:48 AM, Daniel Sun wrote: > Hi Paul, > > Will the new parser Parrot be included in 2.5.x releases as an > optional parser? If developers want to give it a try, jus

Re: next releases

Hi Paul, Will the new parser Parrot be included in 2.5.x releases as an optional parser? If developers want to give it a try, just turn on the switch "-Dgroovy.antlr4=true". Cheers, Daniel.Sun -- View this message in context: http://groovy.329449.n5.nabble.com/next-releases-tp5737758p57

Re: next releases

+1 on all this :-) I'm impatient to have a beta of 2.5 out! Guillaume On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 3:09 AM, Paul King wrote: > I am thinking we should do a 2.5.0-beta-1 release and possibly a 2.4.9 > in a couple of weeks time. For 2.5.0-beta-1, it would be nice to have > the groovy macro PR reviewe