Re: [hibernate-dev] master and 6.0 branch
I completely agree with everything you say. A few thoughts in-line... On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 12:37 PM Guillaume Smet wrote: > == What to do then > > There are a couple of options: > 1/ no workaround, then we should consider it for 5.x > If it is fixed in 5 then it should be fixed in 6 as well. Either it is no longer a problem or because we port the fix from 5 to 6. Not saying exactly how that happens - just that that needs to be the end result. > 2/ there is a viable workaround, we can postpone it to 6, but we > definitely would need to have something to mark them as we need to fix them > (a version, maybe, or a tag?) - one thing is that it would probably be a > good idea to categorize things a bit because when you revisit something for > 6, it would be a good idea to have the existing bugs in mind as it could > influence the design. > Using a tag seems enticing, but experience tells me that won't really have the effect I think you want. > * if it's something we want to fix in 6, there might be several options: > 2.1/ we can already fix it in 6 because the features are already > implemented > 2.2/ we can't fix it right now > > IMHO, we should start considering taking into account 2.1/ into the daily > work for 6 if we want to make this work as otherwise we will end up with a > very big pile of bugs when 6 finally gets finalized. > > > As for 2.2/, we should really have a way to keep track of them and push > them to case 2.1/ when we can. Note that it's the same case if it's more an > improvement but we consider it as something we want: if we want it, we > should find a way to keep track of it somehow. > > That also means that we would need someone familiar with 6 to help > triaging the issues. IMHO, this can be done once a week, if done regularly > and steadily. > > If we continue fixing bugs, even in 6 only, that still says to the > contributor "we hear you, we are improving". If we just stop fixing bugs > until 6 is more or less feature-complete, then we send a very bad message > IMHO. And we will end up with a pile of unfixed issues in the bugtracker > that we won't really be able to deal with. And less users. > Alpha1 just released the fix for HHH-37. Yep, that's right 37 - the 37th issue ever since we moved to Jira. We *do* keep improving ;) And that's just one of the many. But yes your point is valid. It is very important to keep fixing bugs. ___ hibernate-dev mailing list hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
Re: [hibernate-dev] master and 6.0 branch
Gave it some thoughts while walking a bit. Note: it's just my personal opinion so sharing as such. IMHO, there are a couple of important things: == Triaging We need to keep triaging bugs that are created: this is *very* important because otherwise it will just be a pile of issues added on top of the others. That means: - asking for test cases if there is not - check the test case and validate it's a bug, it's not always obvious - decide if we want to fix it == What to do then There are a couple of options: 1/ no workaround, then we should consider it for 5.x 2/ there is a viable workaround, we can postpone it to 6, but we definitely would need to have something to mark them as we need to fix them (a version, maybe, or a tag?) - one thing is that it would probably be a good idea to categorize things a bit because when you revisit something for 6, it would be a good idea to have the existing bugs in mind as it could influence the design. * if it's something we want to fix in 6, there might be several options: 2.1/ we can already fix it in 6 because the features are already implemented 2.2/ we can't fix it right now IMHO, we should start considering taking into account 2.1/ into the daily work for 6 if we want to make this work as otherwise we will end up with a very big pile of bugs when 6 finally gets finalized. As for 2.2/, we should really have a way to keep track of them and push them to case 2.1/ when we can. Note that it's the same case if it's more an improvement but we consider it as something we want: if we want it, we should find a way to keep track of it somehow. That also means that we would need someone familiar with 6 to help triaging the issues. IMHO, this can be done once a week, if done regularly and steadily. If we continue fixing bugs, even in 6 only, that still says to the contributor "we hear you, we are improving". If we just stop fixing bugs until 6 is more or less feature-complete, then we send a very bad message IMHO. And we will end up with a pile of unfixed issues in the bugtracker that we won't really be able to deal with. And less users. The very important thing IMHO is "taking into account 2.1/ into the daily work for 6". That means 6 development should also include bug fixing of incoming bugs, not only implement missing features. -- Guillaume On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 6:11 PM Guillaume Smet wrote: > > > > Le 6 déc. 2018 à 16:03, Sanne Grinovero a écrit : > > It's 200,000 lines of code difference. Just don't make any change on 5 > > - it's not a good use of our time either, since the future is 6. > > Make 5.x a dead branch is not a good option. > > Especially, since we don’t know when we will release 6. > > We already reduced to the bare minimum the effort spent on 5.x. > > But answering users, reproducing their bugs and fixing them is not a waste > of time. > > Even for 6 as that means we have a test case of something that’s validated > as supposed to work. > > And it can also nourish the 6 design. > > > As you said in the previous paragraph, we're a small team and we can't > > keep developing 2 branches of the same project. > > > > 5.x needs to be moved into strictly maintenance only, so please stop > > pushing big changes to 5.x unless there's a very important reason > > You say that as if we pushed big changes to 5.x lately. > > That’s not the case. > > Now if you ask me if we should have a more strict bug fix only policy on > 5.x, I couldn’t agree more. > > That’s what I asked for the CR. I wanted it to be even more strict for CR > = only regressions from 5.3. > > Couldn’t get it to be respected though. > > — > Guillaume > > > ___ hibernate-dev mailing list hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
Re: [hibernate-dev] master and 6.0 branch
> Le 6 déc. 2018 à 16:03, Sanne Grinovero a écrit : > It's 200,000 lines of code difference. Just don't make any change on 5 > - it's not a good use of our time either, since the future is 6. Make 5.x a dead branch is not a good option. Especially, since we don’t know when we will release 6. We already reduced to the bare minimum the effort spent on 5.x. But answering users, reproducing their bugs and fixing them is not a waste of time. Even for 6 as that means we have a test case of something that’s validated as supposed to work. And it can also nourish the 6 design. > As you said in the previous paragraph, we're a small team and we can't > keep developing 2 branches of the same project. > > 5.x needs to be moved into strictly maintenance only, so please stop > pushing big changes to 5.x unless there's a very important reason You say that as if we pushed big changes to 5.x lately. That’s not the case. Now if you ask me if we should have a more strict bug fix only policy on 5.x, I couldn’t agree more. That’s what I asked for the CR. I wanted it to be even more strict for CR = only regressions from 5.3. Couldn’t get it to be respected though. — Guillaume ___ hibernate-dev mailing list hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
Re: [hibernate-dev] Chat migration - D minus 115 until the death of HipChat
> Hey wait a second :) You invited us to try Gitter. That's fine but we > never decided we're migrating to Gitter. Sure. What I meant was that we are *de facto* done migrating to gitter. Not that we meant it, but almost everyone is there already and almost no one is on HipChat. I wouldn't expect important matters to be discussed on Gitter, but then again I seem to remember someone (who was that? ;) ) telling me to use the mailing list, and not HipChat, for important matters. So, you should be fine. That being said, even if the decision to migrate was not made, we will have to make it at some point. So if you want something else, I'd be happy to hear about that :) Yoann Rodière Hibernate NoORM Team yo...@hibernate.org On Thu, 6 Dec 2018 at 16:16, Steve Ebersole wrote: > I am never on HipChat at this point. So don't expect any important > matters to be discussed there ;) > > > On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 9:08 AM Sanne Grinovero > wrote: > >> On Thu, 6 Dec 2018 at 10:25, Yoann Rodiere wrote: >> > >> > > You also need to use ctrl+enter to send a message, the default enter >> is a >> > new line in your message >> > >> > There's a checkbox to change that, and its value is persisted, so you >> only >> > have to tick it once. It's located just beside the "Send" button, I'm >> sure >> > you saw it :) >> > But apart from that, yes, I agree it's not very user-friendly. It's more >> > about the user getting used to the tool than the tool being made obvious >> > from the start. >> > >> > I'm also unsure how long Gitter will continue to be maintained, and how >> > well it will be. But we're mostly done migrating to Gitter; I don't see >> > much activity on HipChat anymore. >> >> Hey wait a second :) You invited us to try Gitter. That's fine but we >> never decided we're migrating to Gitter. >> >> I'm certainly not on Gitter regularly nor right now, so I'm expecting >> any important matter to be discussed on mailing lists or HipChat. >> >> > >> > Objectively, and regardless of my preferred tool, the main drawback I >> can >> > see about not moving to Zulip (or another tool) now, but only later, is >> the >> > confusion it will potentially create for users: we were on HipChat, >> > announced we were moving to Gitter and changed the links on our website, >> > and a few months later we move again. That is, I think, something we >> want >> > to avoid. >> > >> > So the question really is: is Gitter the right tool for us, and do we >> trust >> > it to stay the right tool for us long enough (say, at least a couple of >> > years)? >> > >> > Yoann Rodière >> > Hibernate NoORM Team >> > yo...@hibernate.org >> > >> > >> > On Thu, 6 Dec 2018 at 10:41, Guillaume Smet >> > wrote: >> > >> > > So, I'm using Zulip right now on a daily basis. >> > > >> > > I maintain my first impression that it's really not user friendly. >> > > >> > > The fact that you are required to create topics for discussions (or >> find a >> > > suitable topic in a list of a gazillion topics previously created, >> > > obviously without a search engine where you need it - you have a >> global one >> > > at the top where you can find topics) is a pain. You also need to use >> > > ctrl+enter to send a message, the default enter is a new line in your >> > > message. The UI is not very good and I don't see any improvement >> since the >> > > last time I tested it so I'm wondering if they are investing in it. >> > > >> > > We could decide to use it as a dev team as I suppose we would get >> used to >> > > it, but I seriously don't think it's a good alternative for our users >> to >> > > occasionally come chat with us. >> > > >> > > As for Gitter, I agree with the notification issue, the web client is >> all >> > > buggy. Haven't tested the desktop client yet. >> > > >> > > I must admit that I prefer using Gitter. Probably until I get bitten >> by >> > > the 1-1 history issue :). >> > > >> > > From what I can see, GitLab doesn't invest much in Gitter either so I >> > > wonder if it's gonna be viable in the long term. >> > > >> > > I suppose we'll see. >> > > >> > > -- >> > > Guillaume >> > > >> > > On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 8:58 AM Yoann Rodiere >> wrote: >> > > >> > >> The WildFly team is moving from Slack to Zulip, because Zulip seems >> to be >> > >> the only solution that is free, provides unlimited history, and >> allows >> > >> unlimited users even in private rooms (for OSS projects, at least). >> Gitter >> > >> has all that, except unlimited users, as we are limited to 25 people >> per >> > >> private room. >> > >> >> > >> You can join them here: https://wildfly.zulipchat.com/ >> > >> >> > >> Back to our solution... We are now 71 days away from the >> decommissioning >> > >> of >> > >> HipChat. *Is everyone happy with Gitter?* Do you see a strong reason >> to >> > >> keep looking for another solution? >> > >> >> > >> For my part, I noticed problems with the web client, in particular >> with >> > >> notifications, which are sub-standard, but with the desktop
Re: [hibernate-dev] Chat migration - D minus 115 until the death of HipChat
I am never on HipChat at this point. So don't expect any important matters to be discussed there ;) On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 9:08 AM Sanne Grinovero wrote: > On Thu, 6 Dec 2018 at 10:25, Yoann Rodiere wrote: > > > > > You also need to use ctrl+enter to send a message, the default enter > is a > > new line in your message > > > > There's a checkbox to change that, and its value is persisted, so you > only > > have to tick it once. It's located just beside the "Send" button, I'm > sure > > you saw it :) > > But apart from that, yes, I agree it's not very user-friendly. It's more > > about the user getting used to the tool than the tool being made obvious > > from the start. > > > > I'm also unsure how long Gitter will continue to be maintained, and how > > well it will be. But we're mostly done migrating to Gitter; I don't see > > much activity on HipChat anymore. > > Hey wait a second :) You invited us to try Gitter. That's fine but we > never decided we're migrating to Gitter. > > I'm certainly not on Gitter regularly nor right now, so I'm expecting > any important matter to be discussed on mailing lists or HipChat. > > > > > Objectively, and regardless of my preferred tool, the main drawback I can > > see about not moving to Zulip (or another tool) now, but only later, is > the > > confusion it will potentially create for users: we were on HipChat, > > announced we were moving to Gitter and changed the links on our website, > > and a few months later we move again. That is, I think, something we want > > to avoid. > > > > So the question really is: is Gitter the right tool for us, and do we > trust > > it to stay the right tool for us long enough (say, at least a couple of > > years)? > > > > Yoann Rodière > > Hibernate NoORM Team > > yo...@hibernate.org > > > > > > On Thu, 6 Dec 2018 at 10:41, Guillaume Smet > > wrote: > > > > > So, I'm using Zulip right now on a daily basis. > > > > > > I maintain my first impression that it's really not user friendly. > > > > > > The fact that you are required to create topics for discussions (or > find a > > > suitable topic in a list of a gazillion topics previously created, > > > obviously without a search engine where you need it - you have a > global one > > > at the top where you can find topics) is a pain. You also need to use > > > ctrl+enter to send a message, the default enter is a new line in your > > > message. The UI is not very good and I don't see any improvement since > the > > > last time I tested it so I'm wondering if they are investing in it. > > > > > > We could decide to use it as a dev team as I suppose we would get used > to > > > it, but I seriously don't think it's a good alternative for our users > to > > > occasionally come chat with us. > > > > > > As for Gitter, I agree with the notification issue, the web client is > all > > > buggy. Haven't tested the desktop client yet. > > > > > > I must admit that I prefer using Gitter. Probably until I get bitten by > > > the 1-1 history issue :). > > > > > > From what I can see, GitLab doesn't invest much in Gitter either so I > > > wonder if it's gonna be viable in the long term. > > > > > > I suppose we'll see. > > > > > > -- > > > Guillaume > > > > > > On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 8:58 AM Yoann Rodiere > wrote: > > > > > >> The WildFly team is moving from Slack to Zulip, because Zulip seems > to be > > >> the only solution that is free, provides unlimited history, and allows > > >> unlimited users even in private rooms (for OSS projects, at least). > Gitter > > >> has all that, except unlimited users, as we are limited to 25 people > per > > >> private room. > > >> > > >> You can join them here: https://wildfly.zulipchat.com/ > > >> > > >> Back to our solution... We are now 71 days away from the > decommissioning > > >> of > > >> HipChat. *Is everyone happy with Gitter?* Do you see a strong reason > to > > >> keep looking for another solution? > > >> > > >> For my part, I noticed problems with the web client, in particular > with > > >> notifications, which are sub-standard, but with the desktop client > > >> everything seems to work fine. It's simple, but it does the job. > > >> > > >> Yoann Rodière > > >> Hibernate NoORM Team > > >> yo...@hibernate.org > > >> > > >> > > >> On Wed, 21 Nov 2018 at 14:40, Yoann Rodiere > wrote: > > >> > > >> > On top of not being able to add more than 25 people to a private > room, > > >> > there's another limitation of Gitter that Fabio just noticed: the > chat > > >> > history for 1-to-1 conversations is very limited. In our case, we > can > > >> only > > >> > see 2 days back, and there's no concept of archives like there is in > > >> rooms. > > >> > > > >> > Meanwhile, the WildFly team is giving up on Slack because of the > very > > >> > limited size of history in free plans. They are investigating Zulip, > > >> > RocketChat and MatterMost in particular. Maybe let's see what they > end > > >> up > > >> > choosing and why? > > >> > > > >> > Yoann Rodière > >
Re: [hibernate-dev] master and 6.0 branch
Good points. I should have mentioned that. At this point no new features, no improvements, no enhancements should be done on 5. Just bug fixes. And to be clear, I am actually fine with continuing to develop the bug fixes on 5. The point was more about pushing something to 5 and then that is it. We have to clearly decide as a team (1) whether that change needs to be done on 6 and (2) how to go about that. Definitely for some period of time I fully expect that to mean Andrea, Chris, Davide or myself being involved in all such discussions simply because we know 6 better than others. Personally, I prefer developing on 6 and back-porting, but that distinction not really relevant yet - it will become relevant as 6 gets to more of a CR state. On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 8:35 AM andrea boriero wrote: > In my opinion we have to distinguish between the types of issues: > >- improvements, I think they must be done only in 6.0 and backported >only if it is easy >- minor bugs or bugs with a workaround, I think they should be >resolved in 6.0 (in case the feature causing the issue is not yet >implemented in 6.0 he solution should be delayed ) and then backported >- critical bugs should be solved in 6.0 and 5.x in case it is too >difficult to solve them in 6.0 then just add a disabled test. > > > On Thu, 6 Dec 2018 at 13:17, Yoann Rodiere wrote: > >> I personally don't have a problem with that, since I don't contribute very >> often, but I'd like to point out this moves most of the workload of >> merging >> changes into 6 from Andrea/Chris to Gail/Guillaume. >> Another problem being that the tests created/changed in 5.x may not work >> in >> 6 for completely different reasons (e.g. "not implemented yet"). Which >> will >> be hard to diagnose for those not working on 6 on a day-to-day basis. >> >> But I suppose it could work if we moved the focus away from 5.x >> maintenance, which is perhaps what you had in mind? >> >> Yoann Rodière >> Hibernate NoORM Team >> yo...@hibernate.org >> >> >> On Thu, 6 Dec 2018 at 14:01, Steve Ebersole wrote: >> >> > Today, I promise ;), I will release 6.0 Alpha1. But I wanted to start a >> > discussion about managing the master and 6.0 branches in terms of >> > commit/push. To date we (mostly Andrea and Chris, thanks guys!) have >> had >> > to perform very painful "merging" from master to 6.0. As 6.0 was in a >> > pre-Alpha state, that was fine. However, now that we are starting the >> > Alpha release cycle, that is no longer reasonable. So as of today we >> > really need a new strategy here. However it works out, changes made to >> > master than also affect 6.0 should be done in both places. >> > >> > This has 2 benefits IMO: >> > >> >1. Obviously it removes the need to perform these massive, >> >time-consuming "merges" >> >2. A great side effect is that it gets people with 6.0 code base >> >differences. >> > ___ >> > hibernate-dev mailing list >> > hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org >> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev >> > >> ___ >> hibernate-dev mailing list >> hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev > > ___ hibernate-dev mailing list hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
Re: [hibernate-dev] Chat migration - D minus 115 until the death of HipChat
On Thu, 6 Dec 2018 at 10:25, Yoann Rodiere wrote: > > > You also need to use ctrl+enter to send a message, the default enter is a > new line in your message > > There's a checkbox to change that, and its value is persisted, so you only > have to tick it once. It's located just beside the "Send" button, I'm sure > you saw it :) > But apart from that, yes, I agree it's not very user-friendly. It's more > about the user getting used to the tool than the tool being made obvious > from the start. > > I'm also unsure how long Gitter will continue to be maintained, and how > well it will be. But we're mostly done migrating to Gitter; I don't see > much activity on HipChat anymore. Hey wait a second :) You invited us to try Gitter. That's fine but we never decided we're migrating to Gitter. I'm certainly not on Gitter regularly nor right now, so I'm expecting any important matter to be discussed on mailing lists or HipChat. > > Objectively, and regardless of my preferred tool, the main drawback I can > see about not moving to Zulip (or another tool) now, but only later, is the > confusion it will potentially create for users: we were on HipChat, > announced we were moving to Gitter and changed the links on our website, > and a few months later we move again. That is, I think, something we want > to avoid. > > So the question really is: is Gitter the right tool for us, and do we trust > it to stay the right tool for us long enough (say, at least a couple of > years)? > > Yoann Rodière > Hibernate NoORM Team > yo...@hibernate.org > > > On Thu, 6 Dec 2018 at 10:41, Guillaume Smet > wrote: > > > So, I'm using Zulip right now on a daily basis. > > > > I maintain my first impression that it's really not user friendly. > > > > The fact that you are required to create topics for discussions (or find a > > suitable topic in a list of a gazillion topics previously created, > > obviously without a search engine where you need it - you have a global one > > at the top where you can find topics) is a pain. You also need to use > > ctrl+enter to send a message, the default enter is a new line in your > > message. The UI is not very good and I don't see any improvement since the > > last time I tested it so I'm wondering if they are investing in it. > > > > We could decide to use it as a dev team as I suppose we would get used to > > it, but I seriously don't think it's a good alternative for our users to > > occasionally come chat with us. > > > > As for Gitter, I agree with the notification issue, the web client is all > > buggy. Haven't tested the desktop client yet. > > > > I must admit that I prefer using Gitter. Probably until I get bitten by > > the 1-1 history issue :). > > > > From what I can see, GitLab doesn't invest much in Gitter either so I > > wonder if it's gonna be viable in the long term. > > > > I suppose we'll see. > > > > -- > > Guillaume > > > > On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 8:58 AM Yoann Rodiere wrote: > > > >> The WildFly team is moving from Slack to Zulip, because Zulip seems to be > >> the only solution that is free, provides unlimited history, and allows > >> unlimited users even in private rooms (for OSS projects, at least). Gitter > >> has all that, except unlimited users, as we are limited to 25 people per > >> private room. > >> > >> You can join them here: https://wildfly.zulipchat.com/ > >> > >> Back to our solution... We are now 71 days away from the decommissioning > >> of > >> HipChat. *Is everyone happy with Gitter?* Do you see a strong reason to > >> keep looking for another solution? > >> > >> For my part, I noticed problems with the web client, in particular with > >> notifications, which are sub-standard, but with the desktop client > >> everything seems to work fine. It's simple, but it does the job. > >> > >> Yoann Rodière > >> Hibernate NoORM Team > >> yo...@hibernate.org > >> > >> > >> On Wed, 21 Nov 2018 at 14:40, Yoann Rodiere wrote: > >> > >> > On top of not being able to add more than 25 people to a private room, > >> > there's another limitation of Gitter that Fabio just noticed: the chat > >> > history for 1-to-1 conversations is very limited. In our case, we can > >> only > >> > see 2 days back, and there's no concept of archives like there is in > >> rooms. > >> > > >> > Meanwhile, the WildFly team is giving up on Slack because of the very > >> > limited size of history in free plans. They are investigating Zulip, > >> > RocketChat and MatterMost in particular. Maybe let's see what they end > >> up > >> > choosing and why? > >> > > >> > Yoann Rodière > >> > Hibernate NoORM Team > >> > yo...@hibernate.org > >> > > >> > > >> > On Tue, 13 Nov 2018 at 11:33, Yoann Rodiere > >> wrote: > >> > > >> >> On Tue, 13 Nov 2018 at 08:49, Yoann Rodiere > >> wrote: > >> >> > >> >>> > Assuming the new chat platform takes off, there's a risk it might be > >> >>> too successful as well > >> >>> > >> >>> Ok. Well, I guess we'll see. As I mentioned above, I don't think > >> forcing > >> >>>
Re: [hibernate-dev] master and 6.0 branch
On Thu, 6 Dec 2018 at 13:17, Guillaume Smet wrote: > > Hi Steve, > > I don't particularly like it. > > We have very few resources to work on 5.x and clearly we won't be able to > do that + learn about 6 in parallel and fix issues in both, probably in 2 > completely different ways. And we won't really be able to know if it > doesn't work because it's not implemented yet, not fully functional, same > buggy or new buggy. > > We don't push that many things to 5.x so maybe you could explain why the > merges are so painful so that we can try to make them less so? It's 200,000 lines of code difference. Just don't make any change on 5 - it's not a good use of our time either, since the future is 6. As you said in the previous paragraph, we're a small team and we can't keep developing 2 branches of the same project. 5.x needs to be moved into strictly maintenance only, so please stop pushing big changes to 5.x unless there's a very important reason - we need to move on towars a situation in which all innovation happens on 6 aka master. Thanks, Sanne > > -- > Guillaume > > > On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 1:53 PM Steve Ebersole wrote: > > > Today, I promise ;), I will release 6.0 Alpha1. But I wanted to start a > > discussion about managing the master and 6.0 branches in terms of > > commit/push. To date we (mostly Andrea and Chris, thanks guys!) have had > > to perform very painful "merging" from master to 6.0. As 6.0 was in a > > pre-Alpha state, that was fine. However, now that we are starting the > > Alpha release cycle, that is no longer reasonable. So as of today we > > really need a new strategy here. However it works out, changes made to > > master than also affect 6.0 should be done in both places. > > > > This has 2 benefits IMO: > > > >1. Obviously it removes the need to perform these massive, > >time-consuming "merges" > >2. A great side effect is that it gets people with 6.0 code base > >differences. > > ___ > > hibernate-dev mailing list > > hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev > > > ___ > hibernate-dev mailing list > hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev ___ hibernate-dev mailing list hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
Re: [hibernate-dev] master and 6.0 branch
In my opinion we have to distinguish between the types of issues: - improvements, I think they must be done only in 6.0 and backported only if it is easy - minor bugs or bugs with a workaround, I think they should be resolved in 6.0 (in case the feature causing the issue is not yet implemented in 6.0 he solution should be delayed ) and then backported - critical bugs should be solved in 6.0 and 5.x in case it is too difficult to solve them in 6.0 then just add a disabled test. On Thu, 6 Dec 2018 at 13:17, Yoann Rodiere wrote: > I personally don't have a problem with that, since I don't contribute very > often, but I'd like to point out this moves most of the workload of merging > changes into 6 from Andrea/Chris to Gail/Guillaume. > Another problem being that the tests created/changed in 5.x may not work in > 6 for completely different reasons (e.g. "not implemented yet"). Which will > be hard to diagnose for those not working on 6 on a day-to-day basis. > > But I suppose it could work if we moved the focus away from 5.x > maintenance, which is perhaps what you had in mind? > > Yoann Rodière > Hibernate NoORM Team > yo...@hibernate.org > > > On Thu, 6 Dec 2018 at 14:01, Steve Ebersole wrote: > > > Today, I promise ;), I will release 6.0 Alpha1. But I wanted to start a > > discussion about managing the master and 6.0 branches in terms of > > commit/push. To date we (mostly Andrea and Chris, thanks guys!) have had > > to perform very painful "merging" from master to 6.0. As 6.0 was in a > > pre-Alpha state, that was fine. However, now that we are starting the > > Alpha release cycle, that is no longer reasonable. So as of today we > > really need a new strategy here. However it works out, changes made to > > master than also affect 6.0 should be done in both places. > > > > This has 2 benefits IMO: > > > >1. Obviously it removes the need to perform these massive, > >time-consuming "merges" > >2. A great side effect is that it gets people with 6.0 code base > >differences. > > ___ > > hibernate-dev mailing list > > hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev > > > ___ > hibernate-dev mailing list > hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev ___ hibernate-dev mailing list hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
[hibernate-dev] master and 6.0 branch
Today, I promise ;), I will release 6.0 Alpha1. But I wanted to start a discussion about managing the master and 6.0 branches in terms of commit/push. To date we (mostly Andrea and Chris, thanks guys!) have had to perform very painful "merging" from master to 6.0. As 6.0 was in a pre-Alpha state, that was fine. However, now that we are starting the Alpha release cycle, that is no longer reasonable. So as of today we really need a new strategy here. However it works out, changes made to master than also affect 6.0 should be done in both places. This has 2 benefits IMO: 1. Obviously it removes the need to perform these massive, time-consuming "merges" 2. A great side effect is that it gets people with 6.0 code base differences. ___ hibernate-dev mailing list hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
Re: [hibernate-dev] Chat migration - D minus 115 until the death of HipChat
If it helps, Guillaume, the desktop client made all the difference for me. And I hated the idea of moving to Gitter based on just the web client. On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 4:25 AM Yoann Rodiere wrote: > > You also need to use ctrl+enter to send a message, the default enter is a > new line in your message > > There's a checkbox to change that, and its value is persisted, so you only > have to tick it once. It's located just beside the "Send" button, I'm sure > you saw it :) > But apart from that, yes, I agree it's not very user-friendly. It's more > about the user getting used to the tool than the tool being made obvious > from the start. > > I'm also unsure how long Gitter will continue to be maintained, and how > well it will be. But we're mostly done migrating to Gitter; I don't see > much activity on HipChat anymore. > > Objectively, and regardless of my preferred tool, the main drawback I can > see about not moving to Zulip (or another tool) now, but only later, is the > confusion it will potentially create for users: we were on HipChat, > announced we were moving to Gitter and changed the links on our website, > and a few months later we move again. That is, I think, something we want > to avoid. > > So the question really is: is Gitter the right tool for us, and do we trust > it to stay the right tool for us long enough (say, at least a couple of > years)? > > Yoann Rodière > Hibernate NoORM Team > yo...@hibernate.org > > > On Thu, 6 Dec 2018 at 10:41, Guillaume Smet > wrote: > > > So, I'm using Zulip right now on a daily basis. > > > > I maintain my first impression that it's really not user friendly. > > > > The fact that you are required to create topics for discussions (or find > a > > suitable topic in a list of a gazillion topics previously created, > > obviously without a search engine where you need it - you have a global > one > > at the top where you can find topics) is a pain. You also need to use > > ctrl+enter to send a message, the default enter is a new line in your > > message. The UI is not very good and I don't see any improvement since > the > > last time I tested it so I'm wondering if they are investing in it. > > > > We could decide to use it as a dev team as I suppose we would get used to > > it, but I seriously don't think it's a good alternative for our users to > > occasionally come chat with us. > > > > As for Gitter, I agree with the notification issue, the web client is all > > buggy. Haven't tested the desktop client yet. > > > > I must admit that I prefer using Gitter. Probably until I get bitten by > > the 1-1 history issue :). > > > > From what I can see, GitLab doesn't invest much in Gitter either so I > > wonder if it's gonna be viable in the long term. > > > > I suppose we'll see. > > > > -- > > Guillaume > > > > On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 8:58 AM Yoann Rodiere > wrote: > > > >> The WildFly team is moving from Slack to Zulip, because Zulip seems to > be > >> the only solution that is free, provides unlimited history, and allows > >> unlimited users even in private rooms (for OSS projects, at least). > Gitter > >> has all that, except unlimited users, as we are limited to 25 people per > >> private room. > >> > >> You can join them here: https://wildfly.zulipchat.com/ > >> > >> Back to our solution... We are now 71 days away from the decommissioning > >> of > >> HipChat. *Is everyone happy with Gitter?* Do you see a strong reason to > >> keep looking for another solution? > >> > >> For my part, I noticed problems with the web client, in particular with > >> notifications, which are sub-standard, but with the desktop client > >> everything seems to work fine. It's simple, but it does the job. > >> > >> Yoann Rodière > >> Hibernate NoORM Team > >> yo...@hibernate.org > >> > >> > >> On Wed, 21 Nov 2018 at 14:40, Yoann Rodiere > wrote: > >> > >> > On top of not being able to add more than 25 people to a private room, > >> > there's another limitation of Gitter that Fabio just noticed: the chat > >> > history for 1-to-1 conversations is very limited. In our case, we can > >> only > >> > see 2 days back, and there's no concept of archives like there is in > >> rooms. > >> > > >> > Meanwhile, the WildFly team is giving up on Slack because of the very > >> > limited size of history in free plans. They are investigating Zulip, > >> > RocketChat and MatterMost in particular. Maybe let's see what they end > >> up > >> > choosing and why? > >> > > >> > Yoann Rodière > >> > Hibernate NoORM Team > >> > yo...@hibernate.org > >> > > >> > > >> > On Tue, 13 Nov 2018 at 11:33, Yoann Rodiere > >> wrote: > >> > > >> >> On Tue, 13 Nov 2018 at 08:49, Yoann Rodiere > >> wrote: > >> >> > >> >>> > Assuming the new chat platform takes off, there's a risk it might > be > >> >>> too successful as well > >> >>> > >> >>> Ok. Well, I guess we'll see. As I mentioned above, I don't think > >> forcing > >> >>> people to have a GitHub account will be very effective, but I can't > >> suggest > >> >>>
Re: [hibernate-dev] Chat migration - D minus 115 until the death of HipChat
On 12/06/2018 10:40 AM, Guillaume Smet wrote: > So, I'm using Zulip right now on a daily basis. > > I maintain my first impression that it's really not user friendly. > > The fact that you are required to create topics for discussions Why is creating a new topic (=typing three extra words) an issue? This is the killer feature why many people love Zulip. (I would not spend more than 5 seconds checking for any existing topic on similar matter) > (or find a > suitable topic in a list of a gazillion topics previously created, > obviously without a search engine where you need it - you have a global one > at the top where you can find topics) is a pain. You also need to use > ctrl+enter to send a message, the default enter is a new line in your > message. There's a checkbox just next to the Send button, check it once and the setting persists. > The UI is not very good and I don't see any improvement since the > last time I tested it so I'm wondering if they are investing in it. Maybe they don't have feedback? Besides zooming in (View - Zoom In) I am perfectly satisfied with the UI. Actually one thing that I am not 100% comfortable with is the active/inactive status, which marks people inactive despite they have the client just on the background. Radim > > We could decide to use it as a dev team as I suppose we would get used to > it, but I seriously don't think it's a good alternative for our users to > occasionally come chat with us. > > As for Gitter, I agree with the notification issue, the web client is all > buggy. Haven't tested the desktop client yet. > > I must admit that I prefer using Gitter. Probably until I get bitten by the > 1-1 history issue :). > > From what I can see, GitLab doesn't invest much in Gitter either so I > wonder if it's gonna be viable in the long term. > > I suppose we'll see. > -- Radim Vansa JBoss Performance Team ___ hibernate-dev mailing list hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
Re: [hibernate-dev] Chat migration - D minus 115 until the death of HipChat
> You also need to use ctrl+enter to send a message, the default enter is a new line in your message There's a checkbox to change that, and its value is persisted, so you only have to tick it once. It's located just beside the "Send" button, I'm sure you saw it :) But apart from that, yes, I agree it's not very user-friendly. It's more about the user getting used to the tool than the tool being made obvious from the start. I'm also unsure how long Gitter will continue to be maintained, and how well it will be. But we're mostly done migrating to Gitter; I don't see much activity on HipChat anymore. Objectively, and regardless of my preferred tool, the main drawback I can see about not moving to Zulip (or another tool) now, but only later, is the confusion it will potentially create for users: we were on HipChat, announced we were moving to Gitter and changed the links on our website, and a few months later we move again. That is, I think, something we want to avoid. So the question really is: is Gitter the right tool for us, and do we trust it to stay the right tool for us long enough (say, at least a couple of years)? Yoann Rodière Hibernate NoORM Team yo...@hibernate.org On Thu, 6 Dec 2018 at 10:41, Guillaume Smet wrote: > So, I'm using Zulip right now on a daily basis. > > I maintain my first impression that it's really not user friendly. > > The fact that you are required to create topics for discussions (or find a > suitable topic in a list of a gazillion topics previously created, > obviously without a search engine where you need it - you have a global one > at the top where you can find topics) is a pain. You also need to use > ctrl+enter to send a message, the default enter is a new line in your > message. The UI is not very good and I don't see any improvement since the > last time I tested it so I'm wondering if they are investing in it. > > We could decide to use it as a dev team as I suppose we would get used to > it, but I seriously don't think it's a good alternative for our users to > occasionally come chat with us. > > As for Gitter, I agree with the notification issue, the web client is all > buggy. Haven't tested the desktop client yet. > > I must admit that I prefer using Gitter. Probably until I get bitten by > the 1-1 history issue :). > > From what I can see, GitLab doesn't invest much in Gitter either so I > wonder if it's gonna be viable in the long term. > > I suppose we'll see. > > -- > Guillaume > > On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 8:58 AM Yoann Rodiere wrote: > >> The WildFly team is moving from Slack to Zulip, because Zulip seems to be >> the only solution that is free, provides unlimited history, and allows >> unlimited users even in private rooms (for OSS projects, at least). Gitter >> has all that, except unlimited users, as we are limited to 25 people per >> private room. >> >> You can join them here: https://wildfly.zulipchat.com/ >> >> Back to our solution... We are now 71 days away from the decommissioning >> of >> HipChat. *Is everyone happy with Gitter?* Do you see a strong reason to >> keep looking for another solution? >> >> For my part, I noticed problems with the web client, in particular with >> notifications, which are sub-standard, but with the desktop client >> everything seems to work fine. It's simple, but it does the job. >> >> Yoann Rodière >> Hibernate NoORM Team >> yo...@hibernate.org >> >> >> On Wed, 21 Nov 2018 at 14:40, Yoann Rodiere wrote: >> >> > On top of not being able to add more than 25 people to a private room, >> > there's another limitation of Gitter that Fabio just noticed: the chat >> > history for 1-to-1 conversations is very limited. In our case, we can >> only >> > see 2 days back, and there's no concept of archives like there is in >> rooms. >> > >> > Meanwhile, the WildFly team is giving up on Slack because of the very >> > limited size of history in free plans. They are investigating Zulip, >> > RocketChat and MatterMost in particular. Maybe let's see what they end >> up >> > choosing and why? >> > >> > Yoann Rodière >> > Hibernate NoORM Team >> > yo...@hibernate.org >> > >> > >> > On Tue, 13 Nov 2018 at 11:33, Yoann Rodiere >> wrote: >> > >> >> On Tue, 13 Nov 2018 at 08:49, Yoann Rodiere >> wrote: >> >> >> >>> > Assuming the new chat platform takes off, there's a risk it might be >> >>> too successful as well >> >>> >> >>> Ok. Well, I guess we'll see. As I mentioned above, I don't think >> forcing >> >>> people to have a GitHub account will be very effective, but I can't >> suggest >> >>> a perfect solution either. Bots answering with a few links >> (documentation, >> >>> etc.) to the first message of each user come to mind, but that could >> be >> >>> considered rude, so I wouldn't do that unless the traffic becomes >> >>> unmanageable. Other solutions include kicking out "spammers" (but that >> >>> doesn't work if it's many users asking a single question), or making >> the >> >>> -dev rooms invite-only and only checking the user
Re: [hibernate-dev] Chat migration - D minus 115 until the death of HipChat
So, I'm using Zulip right now on a daily basis. I maintain my first impression that it's really not user friendly. The fact that you are required to create topics for discussions (or find a suitable topic in a list of a gazillion topics previously created, obviously without a search engine where you need it - you have a global one at the top where you can find topics) is a pain. You also need to use ctrl+enter to send a message, the default enter is a new line in your message. The UI is not very good and I don't see any improvement since the last time I tested it so I'm wondering if they are investing in it. We could decide to use it as a dev team as I suppose we would get used to it, but I seriously don't think it's a good alternative for our users to occasionally come chat with us. As for Gitter, I agree with the notification issue, the web client is all buggy. Haven't tested the desktop client yet. I must admit that I prefer using Gitter. Probably until I get bitten by the 1-1 history issue :). From what I can see, GitLab doesn't invest much in Gitter either so I wonder if it's gonna be viable in the long term. I suppose we'll see. -- Guillaume On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 8:58 AM Yoann Rodiere wrote: > The WildFly team is moving from Slack to Zulip, because Zulip seems to be > the only solution that is free, provides unlimited history, and allows > unlimited users even in private rooms (for OSS projects, at least). Gitter > has all that, except unlimited users, as we are limited to 25 people per > private room. > > You can join them here: https://wildfly.zulipchat.com/ > > Back to our solution... We are now 71 days away from the decommissioning of > HipChat. *Is everyone happy with Gitter?* Do you see a strong reason to > keep looking for another solution? > > For my part, I noticed problems with the web client, in particular with > notifications, which are sub-standard, but with the desktop client > everything seems to work fine. It's simple, but it does the job. > > Yoann Rodière > Hibernate NoORM Team > yo...@hibernate.org > > > On Wed, 21 Nov 2018 at 14:40, Yoann Rodiere wrote: > > > On top of not being able to add more than 25 people to a private room, > > there's another limitation of Gitter that Fabio just noticed: the chat > > history for 1-to-1 conversations is very limited. In our case, we can > only > > see 2 days back, and there's no concept of archives like there is in > rooms. > > > > Meanwhile, the WildFly team is giving up on Slack because of the very > > limited size of history in free plans. They are investigating Zulip, > > RocketChat and MatterMost in particular. Maybe let's see what they end up > > choosing and why? > > > > Yoann Rodière > > Hibernate NoORM Team > > yo...@hibernate.org > > > > > > On Tue, 13 Nov 2018 at 11:33, Yoann Rodiere wrote: > > > >> On Tue, 13 Nov 2018 at 08:49, Yoann Rodiere > wrote: > >> > >>> > Assuming the new chat platform takes off, there's a risk it might be > >>> too successful as well > >>> > >>> Ok. Well, I guess we'll see. As I mentioned above, I don't think > forcing > >>> people to have a GitHub account will be very effective, but I can't > suggest > >>> a perfect solution either. Bots answering with a few links > (documentation, > >>> etc.) to the first message of each user come to mind, but that could be > >>> considered rude, so I wouldn't do that unless the traffic becomes > >>> unmanageable. Other solutions include kicking out "spammers" (but that > >>> doesn't work if it's many users asking a single question), or making > the > >>> -dev rooms invite-only and only checking the user rooms once in a while > >>> (might work if Gitter sends emails when your are mentioned while > offline). > >>> So, yeah, in short: I don't really know. > >>> > >>> > More just accountability. But if some form of login in needed to use > >>> Gitter, that's enough for me. Sounded like the other option was "allow > >>> anonymous", which I wanted to avoid. > >>> > >>> Then it should be fine: anonymous access apparently only allows to read > >>> messages. Login through GitLab, GitHub or Twitter is necessary in > order to > >>> start posting new messages. > >>> > >>> Yoann Rodière > >>> Hibernate NoORM Team > >>> yo...@hibernate.org > >>> > >>> > >>> On Mon, 12 Nov 2018 at 19:34, Steve Ebersole > >>> wrote: > >>> > For me its not so much about "the right kind of people". More just > accountability. But if some form of login in needed to use Gitter, > that's > enough for me. Sounded like the other option was "allow anonymous", > which > I wanted to avoid. > > On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 11:41 AM Sanne Grinovero > > wrote: > > > On Mon, 12 Nov 2018 at 17:27, Yoann Rodiere > > wrote: > > > > > > I don't see why we should force people to have a GitHub account, > > considering there are other means of logging into Gitter. > > > > Ok. > > > > > > > > As to getting the right type of
Re: [hibernate-dev] Chat migration - D minus 115 until the death of HipChat
I'm fine with it. Am 06.12.2018 um 08:52 schrieb Yoann Rodiere: > The WildFly team is moving from Slack to Zulip, because Zulip seems to be > the only solution that is free, provides unlimited history, and allows > unlimited users even in private rooms (for OSS projects, at least). Gitter > has all that, except unlimited users, as we are limited to 25 people per > private room. > > You can join them here: https://wildfly.zulipchat.com/ > > Back to our solution... We are now 71 days away from the decommissioning of > HipChat. *Is everyone happy with Gitter?* Do you see a strong reason to > keep looking for another solution? > > For my part, I noticed problems with the web client, in particular with > notifications, which are sub-standard, but with the desktop client > everything seems to work fine. It's simple, but it does the job. > > Yoann Rodière > Hibernate NoORM Team > yo...@hibernate.org > > > On Wed, 21 Nov 2018 at 14:40, Yoann Rodiere wrote: > >> On top of not being able to add more than 25 people to a private room, >> there's another limitation of Gitter that Fabio just noticed: the chat >> history for 1-to-1 conversations is very limited. In our case, we can only >> see 2 days back, and there's no concept of archives like there is in rooms. >> >> Meanwhile, the WildFly team is giving up on Slack because of the very >> limited size of history in free plans. They are investigating Zulip, >> RocketChat and MatterMost in particular. Maybe let's see what they end up >> choosing and why? >> >> Yoann Rodière >> Hibernate NoORM Team >> yo...@hibernate.org >> >> >> On Tue, 13 Nov 2018 at 11:33, Yoann Rodiere wrote: >> >>> On Tue, 13 Nov 2018 at 08:49, Yoann Rodiere wrote: >>> > Assuming the new chat platform takes off, there's a risk it might be too successful as well Ok. Well, I guess we'll see. As I mentioned above, I don't think forcing people to have a GitHub account will be very effective, but I can't suggest a perfect solution either. Bots answering with a few links (documentation, etc.) to the first message of each user come to mind, but that could be considered rude, so I wouldn't do that unless the traffic becomes unmanageable. Other solutions include kicking out "spammers" (but that doesn't work if it's many users asking a single question), or making the -dev rooms invite-only and only checking the user rooms once in a while (might work if Gitter sends emails when your are mentioned while offline). So, yeah, in short: I don't really know. > More just accountability. But if some form of login in needed to use Gitter, that's enough for me. Sounded like the other option was "allow anonymous", which I wanted to avoid. Then it should be fine: anonymous access apparently only allows to read messages. Login through GitLab, GitHub or Twitter is necessary in order to start posting new messages. Yoann Rodière Hibernate NoORM Team yo...@hibernate.org On Mon, 12 Nov 2018 at 19:34, Steve Ebersole wrote: > For me its not so much about "the right kind of people". More just > accountability. But if some form of login in needed to use Gitter, that's > enough for me. Sounded like the other option was "allow anonymous", which > I wanted to avoid. > > On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 11:41 AM Sanne Grinovero > wrote: > >> On Mon, 12 Nov 2018 at 17:27, Yoann Rodiere >> wrote: >>> I don't see why we should force people to have a GitHub account, >> considering there are other means of logging into Gitter. >> >> Ok. >> >>> As to getting the right type of people, I'm not sure it's relevant. >> Most people are likely to have one, and those who don't are likely to not >> have one for political reasons (think free software extremists) rather >> than >> because they aren't tech savvy enough: while the "hibernate" naming might >> confuse users looking for information about grizzly bears, I doubt my >> grandmother, my 7-year-old nephew or even my non-software-engineer of a >> wife would end up on Gitter by mistake. >> >> Well since that's obvious, clearly I was referring to a different way >> of cathegorizing people joining@ not by age or expertise in technology >> but in having reasonable expectations and willing to do some research >> before bothering us all. >> >> You probably weren't around yet, but Hibernate has had hard times in >> which it was "victim of its own success": just too many >> kinda-interested people making a ton of basic questions that could be >> easily solved otherwise. >> >> Some "barriers" we have in place have made it manageable; of course I >> can't tell if it's all merit of the barriers of entry or just people >> coming in lower volumes with better intentions, but I'm confident that >> some of the
