[ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
Hi Engine developers (and others :) ), I would like to share some thoughts & questions with you about the future of LinqUtils 1. Location of LinqUtils Currently LinqUtils resides at utils. However, as LinqUtils contains some non engine related code, I think it should be moved to the new uutils (universal utils) project. uutils was introduced during the work on AAA, in order to provide a set of utilities that are not engine related, and hopefully in the future will be published as a separate artifcat on maven central (Alon, feel free to correct me here :) ) 2. The name LinqUtils - Linq comes from c#. I think these days are way behind us (3 years or so now?) i would like to suggest renaming the class. CollectionUtils? Any other suggestions are more than welcome Thanks, Yair
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> To: devel@ovirt.org Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 5:50:44 AM Subject: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
Hi Engine developers (and others :) ), I would like to share some thoughts & questions with you about the future of LinqUtils
1. Location of LinqUtils
Currently LinqUtils resides at utils. However, as LinqUtils contains some non engine related code, I think it should be moved to the new uutils (universal utils) project. uutils was introduced during the work on AAA, in order to provide a set of utilities that are not engine related, and hopefully in the future will be published as a separate artifcat on maven central (Alon, feel free to correct me here :) )
+1 You'd probably have to address the entire org.ovirt.engine.core.utils.linq package and not just that specific class. A sort of a clean-up is also required (i.e. remove IDE generated comments), seems like a good chance to do it.
2. The name LinqUtils - Linq comes from c#. I think these days are way behind us (3 years or so now?) i would like to suggest renaming the class. CollectionUtils? Any other suggestions are more than welcome
+1
Thanks, Yair _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
IMO, we have too many classes that do the same (useless) thing - org.ovirt.engine.core.utils.linq.LinqUtils and org.ovirt.engine.core.common.utils.ListUtils, which both have no place in oVirt-engine. Why not scrap both of them, upgrade commons-collections to the modern 4.0 and use org.apache.commons.collections4.CollectionUtils which has all of their functionality, fully-tested, and maintained by someone else? ----- Original Message -----
From: "Moti Asayag" <masayag@redhat.com> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> Cc: devel@ovirt.org Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 9:04:05 AM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> To: devel@ovirt.org Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 5:50:44 AM Subject: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
Hi Engine developers (and others :) ), I would like to share some thoughts & questions with you about the future of LinqUtils
1. Location of LinqUtils
Currently LinqUtils resides at utils. However, as LinqUtils contains some non engine related code, I think it should be moved to the new uutils (universal utils) project. uutils was introduced during the work on AAA, in order to provide a set of utilities that are not engine related, and hopefully in the future will be published as a separate artifcat on maven central (Alon, feel free to correct me here :) )
+1 You'd probably have to address the entire org.ovirt.engine.core.utils.linq package and not just that specific class. A sort of a clean-up is also required (i.e. remove IDE generated comments), seems like a good chance to do it.
2. The name LinqUtils - Linq comes from c#. I think these days are way behind us (3 years or so now?) i would like to suggest renaming the class. CollectionUtils? Any other suggestions are more than welcome
+1
Thanks, Yair _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
_______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
----- Original Message -----
From: "Allon Mureinik" <amureini@redhat.com> To: "Moti Asayag" <masayag@redhat.com> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 10:53:01 AM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
IMO, we have too many classes that do the same (useless) thing - org.ovirt.engine.core.utils.linq.LinqUtils and org.ovirt.engine.core.common.utils.ListUtils, which both have no place in oVirt-engine. Why not scrap both of them, upgrade commons-collections to the modern 4.0 and use org.apache.commons.collections4.CollectionUtils which has all of their functionality, fully-tested, and maintained by someone else?
Regarding upgrade to 4.0 - IMHO there was some packaging issue. I think Yevgeny Zaspitsky raised the issue at the past. But yeah, if there is no issue there, I'm in favor.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Moti Asayag" <masayag@redhat.com> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> Cc: devel@ovirt.org Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 9:04:05 AM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> To: devel@ovirt.org Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 5:50:44 AM Subject: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
Hi Engine developers (and others :) ), I would like to share some thoughts & questions with you about the future of LinqUtils
1. Location of LinqUtils
Currently LinqUtils resides at utils. However, as LinqUtils contains some non engine related code, I think it should be moved to the new uutils (universal utils) project. uutils was introduced during the work on AAA, in order to provide a set of utilities that are not engine related, and hopefully in the future will be published as a separate artifcat on maven central (Alon, feel free to correct me here :) )
+1 You'd probably have to address the entire org.ovirt.engine.core.utils.linq package and not just that specific class. A sort of a clean-up is also required (i.e. remove IDE generated comments), seems like a good chance to do it.
2. The name LinqUtils - Linq comes from c#. I think these days are way behind us (3 years or so now?) i would like to suggest renaming the class. CollectionUtils? Any other suggestions are more than welcome
+1
Thanks, Yair _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
_______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> To: "Allon Mureinik" <amureini@redhat.com> Cc: devel@ovirt.org Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 10:04:13 AM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
----- Original Message -----
From: "Allon Mureinik" <amureini@redhat.com> To: "Moti Asayag" <masayag@redhat.com> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 10:53:01 AM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
IMO, we have too many classes that do the same (useless) thing - org.ovirt.engine.core.utils.linq.LinqUtils and org.ovirt.engine.core.common.utils.ListUtils, which both have no place in oVirt-engine. Why not scrap both of them, upgrade commons-collections to the modern 4.0 and use org.apache.commons.collections4.CollectionUtils which has all of their functionality, fully-tested, and maintained by someone else?
Regarding upgrade to 4.0 - IMHO there was some packaging issue. I think Yevgeny Zaspitsky raised the issue at the past.
But yeah, if there is no issue there, I'm in favor.
If there's a problem with common-collections 4, so why not use guava, which contains a lot of other useful stuff. https://code.google.com/p/guava-libraries/
----- Original Message -----
From: "Moti Asayag" <masayag@redhat.com> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> Cc: devel@ovirt.org Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 9:04:05 AM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> To: devel@ovirt.org Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 5:50:44 AM Subject: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
Hi Engine developers (and others :) ), I would like to share some thoughts & questions with you about the future of LinqUtils
1. Location of LinqUtils
Currently LinqUtils resides at utils. However, as LinqUtils contains some non engine related code, I think it should be moved to the new uutils (universal utils) project. uutils was introduced during the work on AAA, in order to provide a set of utilities that are not engine related, and hopefully in the future will be published as a separate artifcat on maven central (Alon, feel free to correct me here :) )
+1 You'd probably have to address the entire org.ovirt.engine.core.utils.linq package and not just that specific class. A sort of a clean-up is also required (i.e. remove IDE generated comments), seems like a good chance to do it.
2. The name LinqUtils - Linq comes from c#. I think these days are way behind us (3 years or so now?) i would like to suggest renaming the class. CollectionUtils? Any other suggestions are more than welcome
+1
Thanks, Yair _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
_______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
_______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> To: "Allon Mureinik" <amureini@redhat.com> Cc: "Moti Asayag" <masayag@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org, "Yevgeny Zaspitsky" <yzaspits@redhat.com> Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 11:04:13 AM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
----- Original Message -----
From: "Allon Mureinik" <amureini@redhat.com> To: "Moti Asayag" <masayag@redhat.com> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 10:53:01 AM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
IMO, we have too many classes that do the same (useless) thing - org.ovirt.engine.core.utils.linq.LinqUtils and org.ovirt.engine.core.common.utils.ListUtils, which both have no place in oVirt-engine. Why not scrap both of them, upgrade commons-collections to the modern 4.0 and use org.apache.commons.collections4.CollectionUtils which has all of their functionality, fully-tested, and maintained by someone else?
Regarding upgrade to 4.0 - IMHO there was some packaging issue. I think Yevgeny Zaspitsky raised the issue at the past.
This is the mentioned thread: http://lists.ovirt.org/pipermail/devel/2014-April/007050.html
But yeah, if there is no issue there, I'm in favor.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Moti Asayag" <masayag@redhat.com> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> Cc: devel@ovirt.org Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 9:04:05 AM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> To: devel@ovirt.org Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 5:50:44 AM Subject: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
Hi Engine developers (and others :) ), I would like to share some thoughts & questions with you about the future of LinqUtils
1. Location of LinqUtils
Currently LinqUtils resides at utils. However, as LinqUtils contains some non engine related code, I think it should be moved to the new uutils (universal utils) project. uutils was introduced during the work on AAA, in order to provide a set of utilities that are not engine related, and hopefully in the future will be published as a separate artifcat on maven central (Alon, feel free to correct me here :) )
+1 You'd probably have to address the entire org.ovirt.engine.core.utils.linq package and not just that specific class. A sort of a clean-up is also required (i.e. remove IDE generated comments), seems like a good chance to do it.
2. The name LinqUtils - Linq comes from c#. I think these days are way behind us (3 years or so now?) i would like to suggest renaming the class. CollectionUtils? Any other suggestions are more than welcome
+1
Thanks, Yair _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
_______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
It seems like we can try moving to common-collections4. Yum on my Fedora20 computer finds apache-commons-collections4 package. Fortunately somebody packed the jar into for a rpm for us. :-) ----- Original Message -----
From: "Moti Asayag" <masayag@redhat.com> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> Cc: "Allon Mureinik" <amureini@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org, "Yevgeny Zaspitsky" <yzaspits@redhat.com> Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 11:18:53 AM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> To: "Allon Mureinik" <amureini@redhat.com> Cc: "Moti Asayag" <masayag@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org, "Yevgeny Zaspitsky" <yzaspits@redhat.com> Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 11:04:13 AM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
----- Original Message -----
From: "Allon Mureinik" <amureini@redhat.com> To: "Moti Asayag" <masayag@redhat.com> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 10:53:01 AM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
IMO, we have too many classes that do the same (useless) thing - org.ovirt.engine.core.utils.linq.LinqUtils and org.ovirt.engine.core.common.utils.ListUtils, which both have no place in oVirt-engine. Why not scrap both of them, upgrade commons-collections to the modern 4.0 and use org.apache.commons.collections4.CollectionUtils which has all of their functionality, fully-tested, and maintained by someone else?
Regarding upgrade to 4.0 - IMHO there was some packaging issue. I think Yevgeny Zaspitsky raised the issue at the past.
This is the mentioned thread: http://lists.ovirt.org/pipermail/devel/2014-April/007050.html
But yeah, if there is no issue there, I'm in favor.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Moti Asayag" <masayag@redhat.com> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> Cc: devel@ovirt.org Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 9:04:05 AM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> To: devel@ovirt.org Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 5:50:44 AM Subject: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
Hi Engine developers (and others :) ), I would like to share some thoughts & questions with you about the future of LinqUtils
1. Location of LinqUtils
Currently LinqUtils resides at utils. However, as LinqUtils contains some non engine related code, I think it should be moved to the new uutils (universal utils) project. uutils was introduced during the work on AAA, in order to provide a set of utilities that are not engine related, and hopefully in the future will be published as a separate artifcat on maven central (Alon, feel free to correct me here :) )
+1 You'd probably have to address the entire org.ovirt.engine.core.utils.linq package and not just that specific class. A sort of a clean-up is also required (i.e. remove IDE generated comments), seems like a good chance to do it.
2. The name LinqUtils - Linq comes from c#. I think these days are way behind us (3 years or so now?) i would like to suggest renaming the class. CollectionUtils? Any other suggestions are more than welcome
+1
Thanks, Yair _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
_______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yevgeny Zaspitsky" <yzaspits@redhat.com> To: "Moti Asayag" <masayag@redhat.com> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, "Allon Mureinik" <amureini@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 11:26:40 AM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
It seems like we can try moving to common-collections4. Yum on my Fedora20 computer finds apache-commons-collections4 package. Fortunately somebody packed the jar into for a rpm for us. :-)
What about RHEL 6.5? Can you please run a quick check?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Moti Asayag" <masayag@redhat.com> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> Cc: "Allon Mureinik" <amureini@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org, "Yevgeny Zaspitsky" <yzaspits@redhat.com> Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 11:18:53 AM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> To: "Allon Mureinik" <amureini@redhat.com> Cc: "Moti Asayag" <masayag@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org, "Yevgeny Zaspitsky" <yzaspits@redhat.com> Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 11:04:13 AM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
----- Original Message -----
From: "Allon Mureinik" <amureini@redhat.com> To: "Moti Asayag" <masayag@redhat.com> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 10:53:01 AM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
IMO, we have too many classes that do the same (useless) thing - org.ovirt.engine.core.utils.linq.LinqUtils and org.ovirt.engine.core.common.utils.ListUtils, which both have no place in oVirt-engine. Why not scrap both of them, upgrade commons-collections to the modern 4.0 and use org.apache.commons.collections4.CollectionUtils which has all of their functionality, fully-tested, and maintained by someone else?
Regarding upgrade to 4.0 - IMHO there was some packaging issue. I think Yevgeny Zaspitsky raised the issue at the past.
This is the mentioned thread: http://lists.ovirt.org/pipermail/devel/2014-April/007050.html
But yeah, if there is no issue there, I'm in favor.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Moti Asayag" <masayag@redhat.com> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> Cc: devel@ovirt.org Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 9:04:05 AM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> To: devel@ovirt.org Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 5:50:44 AM Subject: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
Hi Engine developers (and others :) ), I would like to share some thoughts & questions with you about the future of LinqUtils
1. Location of LinqUtils
Currently LinqUtils resides at utils. However, as LinqUtils contains some non engine related code, I think it should be moved to the new uutils (universal utils) project. uutils was introduced during the work on AAA, in order to provide a set of utilities that are not engine related, and hopefully in the future will be published as a separate artifcat on maven central (Alon, feel free to correct me here :) )
+1 You'd probably have to address the entire org.ovirt.engine.core.utils.linq package and not just that specific class. A sort of a clean-up is also required (i.e. remove IDE generated comments), seems like a good chance to do it.
2. The name LinqUtils - Linq comes from c#. I think these days are way behind us (3 years or so now?) i would like to suggest renaming the class. CollectionUtils? Any other suggestions are more than welcome
+1
Thanks, Yair _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
_______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On 21/08/14 12:08, Yair Zaslavsky wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yevgeny Zaspitsky" <yzaspits@redhat.com> To: "Moti Asayag" <masayag@redhat.com> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, "Allon Mureinik" <amureini@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 11:26:40 AM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
It seems like we can try moving to common-collections4. Yum on my Fedora20 computer finds apache-commons-collections4 package. Fortunately somebody packed the jar into for a rpm for us. :-) What about RHEL 6.5? Can you please run a quick check?
Unfortunately my happiness was too hasty. Only Fedora people care to be in the forward of the technology... The RHEL ones do not care about that...
----- Original Message -----
From: "Moti Asayag" <masayag@redhat.com> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> Cc: "Allon Mureinik" <amureini@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org, "Yevgeny Zaspitsky" <yzaspits@redhat.com> Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 11:18:53 AM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> To: "Allon Mureinik" <amureini@redhat.com> Cc: "Moti Asayag" <masayag@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org, "Yevgeny Zaspitsky" <yzaspits@redhat.com> Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 11:04:13 AM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
----- Original Message -----
From: "Allon Mureinik" <amureini@redhat.com> To: "Moti Asayag" <masayag@redhat.com> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 10:53:01 AM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
IMO, we have too many classes that do the same (useless) thing - org.ovirt.engine.core.utils.linq.LinqUtils and org.ovirt.engine.core.common.utils.ListUtils, which both have no place in oVirt-engine. Why not scrap both of them, upgrade commons-collections to the modern 4.0 and use org.apache.commons.collections4.CollectionUtils which has all of their functionality, fully-tested, and maintained by someone else? Regarding upgrade to 4.0 - IMHO there was some packaging issue. I think Yevgeny Zaspitsky raised the issue at the past.
This is the mentioned thread: http://lists.ovirt.org/pipermail/devel/2014-April/007050.html
But yeah, if there is no issue there, I'm in favor.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Moti Asayag" <masayag@redhat.com> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> Cc: devel@ovirt.org Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 9:04:05 AM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
----- Original Message ----- > From: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> > To: devel@ovirt.org > Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 5:50:44 AM > Subject: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils > > Hi Engine developers (and others :) ), > I would like to share some thoughts & questions with you about the > future > of > LinqUtils > > 1. Location of LinqUtils > > Currently LinqUtils resides at utils. > However, as LinqUtils contains some non engine related code, I > think > it > should be moved to the new uutils (universal utils) project. > uutils was introduced during the work on AAA, in order to provide a > set > of > utilities that are not engine related, and hopefully in the future > will > be > published as a separate artifcat on > maven central (Alon, feel free to correct me here :) ) > +1 You'd probably have to address the entire org.ovirt.engine.core.utils.linq package and not just that specific class. A sort of a clean-up is also required (i.e. remove IDE generated comments), seems like a good chance to do it.
> 2. The name LinqUtils - Linq comes from c#. I think these days are > way > behind > us (3 years or so now?) i would like to suggest renaming the class. > CollectionUtils? Any other suggestions are more than welcome > +1
> > Thanks, > Yair > _______________________________________________ > Devel mailing list > Devel@ovirt.org > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel > _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yevgeny Zaspitsky" <yzaspits@redhat.com> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> Cc: "Moti Asayag" <masayag@redhat.com>, "Allon Mureinik" <amureini@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 4:35:33 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
On 21/08/14 12:08, Yair Zaslavsky wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yevgeny Zaspitsky" <yzaspits@redhat.com> To: "Moti Asayag" <masayag@redhat.com> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, "Allon Mureinik" <amureini@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 11:26:40 AM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
It seems like we can try moving to common-collections4. Yum on my Fedora20 computer finds apache-commons-collections4 package. Fortunately somebody packed the jar into for a rpm for us. :-) What about RHEL 6.5? Can you please run a quick check?
Unfortunately my happiness was too hasty. Only Fedora people care to be in the forward of the technology... The RHEL ones do not care about that...
This is what I remembered. When you responded to the email for the first time , I had a strong deja vu that you tried addressing this issue yourself in the past (commons-collectios4) - due to different reason.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Moti Asayag" <masayag@redhat.com> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> Cc: "Allon Mureinik" <amureini@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org, "Yevgeny Zaspitsky" <yzaspits@redhat.com> Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 11:18:53 AM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> To: "Allon Mureinik" <amureini@redhat.com> Cc: "Moti Asayag" <masayag@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org, "Yevgeny Zaspitsky" <yzaspits@redhat.com> Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 11:04:13 AM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
----- Original Message -----
From: "Allon Mureinik" <amureini@redhat.com> To: "Moti Asayag" <masayag@redhat.com> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 10:53:01 AM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
IMO, we have too many classes that do the same (useless) thing - org.ovirt.engine.core.utils.linq.LinqUtils and org.ovirt.engine.core.common.utils.ListUtils, which both have no place in oVirt-engine. Why not scrap both of them, upgrade commons-collections to the modern 4.0 and use org.apache.commons.collections4.CollectionUtils which has all of their functionality, fully-tested, and maintained by someone else? Regarding upgrade to 4.0 - IMHO there was some packaging issue. I think Yevgeny Zaspitsky raised the issue at the past.
This is the mentioned thread: http://lists.ovirt.org/pipermail/devel/2014-April/007050.html
But yeah, if there is no issue there, I'm in favor.
----- Original Message ----- > From: "Moti Asayag" <masayag@redhat.com> > To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> > Cc: devel@ovirt.org > Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 9:04:05 AM > Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils > > > > ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> >> To: devel@ovirt.org >> Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 5:50:44 AM >> Subject: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils >> >> Hi Engine developers (and others :) ), >> I would like to share some thoughts & questions with you about the >> future >> of >> LinqUtils >> >> 1. Location of LinqUtils >> >> Currently LinqUtils resides at utils. >> However, as LinqUtils contains some non engine related code, I >> think >> it >> should be moved to the new uutils (universal utils) project. >> uutils was introduced during the work on AAA, in order to provide a >> set >> of >> utilities that are not engine related, and hopefully in the future >> will >> be >> published as a separate artifcat on >> maven central (Alon, feel free to correct me here :) ) >> > +1 > You'd probably have to address the entire > org.ovirt.engine.core.utils.linq > package > and not just that specific class. > A sort of a clean-up is also required (i.e. remove IDE generated > comments), > seems > like a good chance to do it. > >> 2. The name LinqUtils - Linq comes from c#. I think these days are >> way >> behind >> us (3 years or so now?) i would like to suggest renaming the class. >> CollectionUtils? Any other suggestions are more than welcome >> > +1 > >> >> Thanks, >> Yair >> _______________________________________________ >> Devel mailing list >> Devel@ovirt.org >> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel >> > _______________________________________________ > Devel mailing list > Devel@ovirt.org > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel >
On 08/21/2014 09:55 AM, Yair Zaslavsky wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yevgeny Zaspitsky" <yzaspits@redhat.com> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> Cc: "Moti Asayag" <masayag@redhat.com>, "Allon Mureinik" <amureini@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 4:35:33 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
On 21/08/14 12:08, Yair Zaslavsky wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yevgeny Zaspitsky" <yzaspits@redhat.com> To: "Moti Asayag" <masayag@redhat.com> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, "Allon Mureinik" <amureini@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 11:26:40 AM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
It seems like we can try moving to common-collections4. Yum on my Fedora20 computer finds apache-commons-collections4 package. Fortunately somebody packed the jar into for a rpm for us. :-) What about RHEL 6.5? Can you please run a quick check?
Unfortunately my happiness was too hasty. Only Fedora people care to be in the forward of the technology... The RHEL ones do not care about that...
This is what I remembered. When you responded to the email for the first time , I had a strong deja vu that you tried addressing this issue yourself in the past (commons-collectios4) - due to different reason.
is there a specific conflict or problem (or a huge chain of dependencies) ?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, "Yevgeny Zaspitsky" <yzaspits@redhat.com> Cc: devel@ovirt.org Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 12:25:52 AM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
On 08/21/2014 09:55 AM, Yair Zaslavsky wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yevgeny Zaspitsky" <yzaspits@redhat.com> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> Cc: "Moti Asayag" <masayag@redhat.com>, "Allon Mureinik" <amureini@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 4:35:33 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
On 21/08/14 12:08, Yair Zaslavsky wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yevgeny Zaspitsky" <yzaspits@redhat.com> To: "Moti Asayag" <masayag@redhat.com> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, "Allon Mureinik" <amureini@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 11:26:40 AM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
It seems like we can try moving to common-collections4. Yum on my Fedora20 computer finds apache-commons-collections4 package. Fortunately somebody packed the jar into for a rpm for us. :-) What about RHEL 6.5? Can you please run a quick check?
Unfortunately my happiness was too hasty. Only Fedora people care to be in the forward of the technology... The RHEL ones do not care about that...
This is what I remembered. When you responded to the email for the first time , I had a strong deja vu that you tried addressing this issue yourself in the past (commons-collectios4) - due to different reason.
is there a specific conflict or problem (or a huge chain of dependencies) ?
To me it seems the answer to both is no - This is the requirement list - java >= 1.5 jpackage-utils rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) <= 5.2-1 Probably a matter of packaging?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> To: "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com> Cc: devel@ovirt.org Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 8:39:31 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
----- Original Message -----
From: "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, "Yevgeny Zaspitsky" <yzaspits@redhat.com> Cc: devel@ovirt.org Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 12:25:52 AM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
On 08/21/2014 09:55 AM, Yair Zaslavsky wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yevgeny Zaspitsky" <yzaspits@redhat.com> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> Cc: "Moti Asayag" <masayag@redhat.com>, "Allon Mureinik" <amureini@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 4:35:33 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
On 21/08/14 12:08, Yair Zaslavsky wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yevgeny Zaspitsky" <yzaspits@redhat.com> To: "Moti Asayag" <masayag@redhat.com> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, "Allon Mureinik" <amureini@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 11:26:40 AM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
It seems like we can try moving to common-collections4. Yum on my Fedora20 computer finds apache-commons-collections4 package. Fortunately somebody packed the jar into for a rpm for us. :-) What about RHEL 6.5? Can you please run a quick check?
Unfortunately my happiness was too hasty. Only Fedora people care to be in the forward of the technology... The RHEL ones do not care about that...
This is what I remembered. When you responded to the email for the first time , I had a strong deja vu that you tried addressing this issue yourself in the past (commons-collectios4) - due to different reason.
is there a specific conflict or problem (or a huge chain of dependencies) ?
To me it seems the answer to both is no -
This is the requirement list -
java >= 1.5 jpackage-utils rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) <= 5.2-1
Probably a matter of packaging?
IIRC, Alon was the one who replied, and the issue was that Jboss included an old version (and we don't have classpath isolation, I guess) Greg
----- Original Message -----
From: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme@redhat.com> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> Cc: "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org, "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 8:39:54 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> To: "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com> Cc: devel@ovirt.org Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 8:39:31 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
----- Original Message -----
From: "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, "Yevgeny Zaspitsky" <yzaspits@redhat.com> Cc: devel@ovirt.org Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 12:25:52 AM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
On 08/21/2014 09:55 AM, Yair Zaslavsky wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yevgeny Zaspitsky" <yzaspits@redhat.com> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> Cc: "Moti Asayag" <masayag@redhat.com>, "Allon Mureinik" <amureini@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 4:35:33 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
On 21/08/14 12:08, Yair Zaslavsky wrote:
----- Original Message ----- > From: "Yevgeny Zaspitsky" <yzaspits@redhat.com> > To: "Moti Asayag" <masayag@redhat.com> > Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, "Allon Mureinik" > <amureini@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org > Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 11:26:40 AM > Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils > > It seems like we can try moving to common-collections4. Yum on my > Fedora20 > computer finds apache-commons-collections4 package. Fortunately > somebody > packed the jar into for a rpm for us. :-) What about RHEL 6.5? Can you please run a quick check?
Unfortunately my happiness was too hasty. Only Fedora people care to be in the forward of the technology... The RHEL ones do not care about that...
This is what I remembered. When you responded to the email for the first time , I had a strong deja vu that you tried addressing this issue yourself in the past (commons-collectios4) - due to different reason.
is there a specific conflict or problem (or a huge chain of dependencies) ?
To me it seems the answer to both is no -
This is the requirement list -
java >= 1.5 jpackage-utils rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) <= 5.2-1
Probably a matter of packaging?
IIRC, Alon was the one who replied, and the issue was that Jboss included an old version (and we don't have classpath isolation, I guess)
Greg
We would like to avoid maintaining and package components that are not provider either by el6 or jboss distribution. But based on other threads, it seems that I am the only one who remained trying to push compliance to the old ways, people feel that can maintain anything anywhere with no effort. Regards, Alon
----- Original Message -----
From: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> To: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme@redhat.com> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 4:20:19 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
----- Original Message -----
From: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme@redhat.com> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> Cc: "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org, "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 8:39:54 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> To: "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com> Cc: devel@ovirt.org Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 8:39:31 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
----- Original Message -----
From: "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, "Yevgeny Zaspitsky" <yzaspits@redhat.com> Cc: devel@ovirt.org Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 12:25:52 AM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
On 08/21/2014 09:55 AM, Yair Zaslavsky wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yevgeny Zaspitsky" <yzaspits@redhat.com> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> Cc: "Moti Asayag" <masayag@redhat.com>, "Allon Mureinik" <amureini@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 4:35:33 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
On 21/08/14 12:08, Yair Zaslavsky wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Yevgeny Zaspitsky" <yzaspits@redhat.com> >> To: "Moti Asayag" <masayag@redhat.com> >> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, "Allon Mureinik" >> <amureini@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org >> Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 11:26:40 AM >> Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils >> >> It seems like we can try moving to common-collections4. Yum on my >> Fedora20 >> computer finds apache-commons-collections4 package. Fortunately >> somebody >> packed the jar into for a rpm for us. :-) > What about RHEL 6.5? Can you please run a quick check? Unfortunately my happiness was too hasty. Only Fedora people care to be in the forward of the technology... The RHEL ones do not care about that...
This is what I remembered. When you responded to the email for the first time , I had a strong deja vu that you tried addressing this issue yourself in the past (commons-collectios4) - due to different reason.
is there a specific conflict or problem (or a huge chain of dependencies) ?
To me it seems the answer to both is no -
This is the requirement list -
java >= 1.5 jpackage-utils rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) <= 5.2-1
Probably a matter of packaging?
IIRC, Alon was the one who replied, and the issue was that Jboss included an old version (and we don't have classpath isolation, I guess)
Greg
We would like to avoid maintaining and package components that are not provider either by el6 or jboss distribution.
But based on other threads, it seems that I am the only one who remained trying to push compliance to the old ways, people feel that can maintain anything anywhere with no effort.
Regards, Alon
If I may clarify, there would be at least two stipulations for introducing collections4. 1. someone else packages it and maintains it, available in Fedora and EL, long term. Quality package. 2. JBoss has proper classloader isolation so that, even though JBoss uses collections3, a webapp can use collections4. I don't know the answer to either question :) Seems like minimal gain to me, though. Greg
----- Original Message -----
From: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme@redhat.com> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 11:33:09 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
----- Original Message -----
From: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> To: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme@redhat.com> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 4:20:19 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
----- Original Message -----
From: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme@redhat.com> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> Cc: "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org, "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 8:39:54 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> To: "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com> Cc: devel@ovirt.org Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 8:39:31 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
----- Original Message -----
From: "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, "Yevgeny Zaspitsky" <yzaspits@redhat.com> Cc: devel@ovirt.org Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 12:25:52 AM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
On 08/21/2014 09:55 AM, Yair Zaslavsky wrote:
----- Original Message ----- > From: "Yevgeny Zaspitsky" <yzaspits@redhat.com> > To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> > Cc: "Moti Asayag" <masayag@redhat.com>, "Allon Mureinik" > <amureini@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org > Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 4:35:33 PM > Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils > > On 21/08/14 12:08, Yair Zaslavsky wrote: >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "Yevgeny Zaspitsky" <yzaspits@redhat.com> >>> To: "Moti Asayag" <masayag@redhat.com> >>> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, "Allon Mureinik" >>> <amureini@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org >>> Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 11:26:40 AM >>> Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils >>> >>> It seems like we can try moving to common-collections4. Yum on >>> my >>> Fedora20 >>> computer finds apache-commons-collections4 package. Fortunately >>> somebody >>> packed the jar into for a rpm for us. :-) >> What about RHEL 6.5? Can you please run a quick check? > Unfortunately my happiness was too hasty. Only Fedora people care > to > be > in the forward of the technology... The RHEL ones do not care > about > that...
This is what I remembered. When you responded to the email for the first time , I had a strong deja vu that you tried addressing this issue yourself in the past (commons-collectios4) - due to different reason.
is there a specific conflict or problem (or a huge chain of dependencies) ?
To me it seems the answer to both is no -
This is the requirement list -
java >= 1.5 jpackage-utils rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) <= 5.2-1
Probably a matter of packaging?
IIRC, Alon was the one who replied, and the issue was that Jboss included an old version (and we don't have classpath isolation, I guess)
Greg
We would like to avoid maintaining and package components that are not provider either by el6 or jboss distribution.
But based on other threads, it seems that I am the only one who remained trying to push compliance to the old ways, people feel that can maintain anything anywhere with no effort.
Regards, Alon
If I may clarify, there would be at least two stipulations for introducing collections4.
1. someone else packages it and maintains it, available in Fedora and EL, long term. Quality package.
this is what missing, us maintaining a new package just to have more beautiful code is something that can be deferred for now.
2. JBoss has proper classloader isolation so that, even though JBoss uses collections3, a webapp can use collections4.
should not be a problem to use both.
I don't know the answer to either question :)
Seems like minimal gain to me, though.
Greg
----- Original Message -----
From: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> To: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme@redhat.com> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 11:36:31 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
----- Original Message -----
From: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme@redhat.com> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 11:33:09 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
----- Original Message -----
From: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> To: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme@redhat.com> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 4:20:19 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
----- Original Message -----
From: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme@redhat.com> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> Cc: "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org, "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 8:39:54 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> To: "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com> Cc: devel@ovirt.org Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 8:39:31 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
----- Original Message -----
From: "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, "Yevgeny Zaspitsky" <yzaspits@redhat.com> Cc: devel@ovirt.org Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 12:25:52 AM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
On 08/21/2014 09:55 AM, Yair Zaslavsky wrote: > > > ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Yevgeny Zaspitsky" <yzaspits@redhat.com> >> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> >> Cc: "Moti Asayag" <masayag@redhat.com>, "Allon Mureinik" >> <amureini@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org >> Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 4:35:33 PM >> Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils >> >> On 21/08/14 12:08, Yair Zaslavsky wrote: >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>> From: "Yevgeny Zaspitsky" <yzaspits@redhat.com> >>>> To: "Moti Asayag" <masayag@redhat.com> >>>> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, "Allon Mureinik" >>>> <amureini@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org >>>> Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 11:26:40 AM >>>> Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils >>>> >>>> It seems like we can try moving to common-collections4. Yum on >>>> my >>>> Fedora20 >>>> computer finds apache-commons-collections4 package. >>>> Fortunately >>>> somebody >>>> packed the jar into for a rpm for us. :-) >>> What about RHEL 6.5? Can you please run a quick check? >> Unfortunately my happiness was too hasty. Only Fedora people >> care >> to >> be >> in the forward of the technology... The RHEL ones do not care >> about >> that... > > This is what I remembered. When you responded to the email for > the > first > time , I had a strong deja vu that you tried addressing this > issue > yourself in the past (commons-collectios4) - due to different > reason. >
is there a specific conflict or problem (or a huge chain of dependencies) ?
To me it seems the answer to both is no -
This is the requirement list -
java >= 1.5 jpackage-utils rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) <= 5.2-1
Probably a matter of packaging?
IIRC, Alon was the one who replied, and the issue was that Jboss included an old version (and we don't have classpath isolation, I guess)
Greg
We would like to avoid maintaining and package components that are not provider either by el6 or jboss distribution.
But based on other threads, it seems that I am the only one who remained trying to push compliance to the old ways, people feel that can maintain anything anywhere with no effort.
Regards, Alon
Alon, I disagree with your comment (about the "you're the only one" part :) ) As I wrote - I had a strong deja-vu about that the issue was already brought up. Now that you reminded , I don't think you're the only person who feels this way. I would also like to understand more what it means before jumping to conclusions and upgrading to collections4. At past I had some issues with another commons project (commons-configuration) that had different versions upstream and downstream. I am sure the changes include not just "move to generics" and should carefully be considered.
If I may clarify, there would be at least two stipulations for introducing collections4.
1. someone else packages it and maintains it, available in Fedora and EL, long term. Quality package.
this is what missing, us maintaining a new package just to have more beautiful code is something that can be deferred for now.
2. JBoss has proper classloader isolation so that, even though JBoss uses collections3, a webapp can use collections4.
should not be a problem to use both.
I don't know the answer to either question :)
Seems like minimal gain to me, though.
Greg
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> Cc: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme@redhat.com>, "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org Sent: Sunday, August 24, 2014 9:51:31 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
----- Original Message -----
From: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> To: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme@redhat.com> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 11:36:31 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
----- Original Message -----
From: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme@redhat.com> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 11:33:09 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
----- Original Message -----
From: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> To: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme@redhat.com> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 4:20:19 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
----- Original Message -----
From: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme@redhat.com> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> Cc: "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org, "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 8:39:54 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> To: "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com> Cc: devel@ovirt.org Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 8:39:31 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
----- Original Message ----- > From: "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com> > To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, "Yevgeny Zaspitsky" > <yzaspits@redhat.com> > Cc: devel@ovirt.org > Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 12:25:52 AM > Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils > > On 08/21/2014 09:55 AM, Yair Zaslavsky wrote: > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > >> From: "Yevgeny Zaspitsky" <yzaspits@redhat.com> > >> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> > >> Cc: "Moti Asayag" <masayag@redhat.com>, "Allon Mureinik" > >> <amureini@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org > >> Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 4:35:33 PM > >> Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils > >> > >> On 21/08/14 12:08, Yair Zaslavsky wrote: > >>> > >>> ----- Original Message ----- > >>>> From: "Yevgeny Zaspitsky" <yzaspits@redhat.com> > >>>> To: "Moti Asayag" <masayag@redhat.com> > >>>> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, "Allon Mureinik" > >>>> <amureini@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org > >>>> Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 11:26:40 AM > >>>> Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils > >>>> > >>>> It seems like we can try moving to common-collections4. Yum > >>>> on > >>>> my > >>>> Fedora20 > >>>> computer finds apache-commons-collections4 package. > >>>> Fortunately > >>>> somebody > >>>> packed the jar into for a rpm for us. :-) > >>> What about RHEL 6.5? Can you please run a quick check? > >> Unfortunately my happiness was too hasty. Only Fedora people > >> care > >> to > >> be > >> in the forward of the technology... The RHEL ones do not care > >> about > >> that... > > > > This is what I remembered. When you responded to the email for > > the > > first > > time , I had a strong deja vu that you tried addressing this > > issue > > yourself in the past (commons-collectios4) - due to different > > reason. > > > > is there a specific conflict or problem (or a huge chain of > dependencies) > ?
To me it seems the answer to both is no -
This is the requirement list -
java >= 1.5 jpackage-utils rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) <= 5.2-1
Probably a matter of packaging?
IIRC, Alon was the one who replied, and the issue was that Jboss included an old version (and we don't have classpath isolation, I guess)
Greg
We would like to avoid maintaining and package components that are not provider either by el6 or jboss distribution.
But based on other threads, it seems that I am the only one who remained trying to push compliance to the old ways, people feel that can maintain anything anywhere with no effort.
Regards, Alon
Alon, I disagree with your comment (about the "you're the only one" part :) )
+1 We have three (four if you include PatternFly) ongoing threads about dependency issues at the moment, and I hope we all realize that Alon is trying to do what's best for our project. I certainly empathize with him. He has a tough role, and there are a lot of us young'uns who want 'shiny new things' brought into the project. I certainly don't have the experience to know about all the long term costs of bringing in dependencies into an enterprise project like this -- but I'm learning :)
As I wrote - I had a strong deja-vu about that the issue was already brought up. Now that you reminded , I don't think you're the only person who feels this way. I would also like to understand more what it means before jumping to conclusions and upgrading to collections4. At past I had some issues with another commons project (commons-configuration) that had different versions upstream and downstream.
I think collections4 is a nonstarter because it's not packaged for EL, IIUC.
I am sure the changes include not just "move to generics" and should carefully be considered.
If I may clarify, there would be at least two stipulations for introducing collections4.
1. someone else packages it and maintains it, available in Fedora and EL, long term. Quality package.
this is what missing, us maintaining a new package just to have more beautiful code is something that can be deferred for now.
2. JBoss has proper classloader isolation so that, even though JBoss uses collections3, a webapp can use collections4.
should not be a problem to use both.
I don't know the answer to either question :)
Seems like minimal gain to me, though.
Greg
----- Original Message -----
From: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme@redhat.com> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> Cc: devel@ovirt.org Sent: Monday, August 25, 2014 1:52:44 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> Cc: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme@redhat.com>, "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org Sent: Sunday, August 24, 2014 9:51:31 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
----- Original Message -----
From: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> To: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme@redhat.com> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 11:36:31 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
----- Original Message -----
From: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme@redhat.com> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 11:33:09 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
----- Original Message -----
From: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> To: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme@redhat.com> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 4:20:19 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
----- Original Message -----
From: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme@redhat.com> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> Cc: "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org, "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 8:39:54 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
----- Original Message ----- > From: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> > To: "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com> > Cc: devel@ovirt.org > Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 8:39:31 PM > Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com> > > To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, "Yevgeny Zaspitsky" > > <yzaspits@redhat.com> > > Cc: devel@ovirt.org > > Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 12:25:52 AM > > Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils > > > > On 08/21/2014 09:55 AM, Yair Zaslavsky wrote: > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > >> From: "Yevgeny Zaspitsky" <yzaspits@redhat.com> > > >> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> > > >> Cc: "Moti Asayag" <masayag@redhat.com>, "Allon Mureinik" > > >> <amureini@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org > > >> Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 4:35:33 PM > > >> Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils > > >> > > >> On 21/08/14 12:08, Yair Zaslavsky wrote: > > >>> > > >>> ----- Original Message ----- > > >>>> From: "Yevgeny Zaspitsky" <yzaspits@redhat.com> > > >>>> To: "Moti Asayag" <masayag@redhat.com> > > >>>> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, "Allon > > >>>> Mureinik" > > >>>> <amureini@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org > > >>>> Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 11:26:40 AM > > >>>> Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about > > >>>> LinqUtils > > >>>> > > >>>> It seems like we can try moving to common-collections4. > > >>>> Yum > > >>>> on > > >>>> my > > >>>> Fedora20 > > >>>> computer finds apache-commons-collections4 package. > > >>>> Fortunately > > >>>> somebody > > >>>> packed the jar into for a rpm for us. :-) > > >>> What about RHEL 6.5? Can you please run a quick check? > > >> Unfortunately my happiness was too hasty. Only Fedora people > > >> care > > >> to > > >> be > > >> in the forward of the technology... The RHEL ones do not > > >> care > > >> about > > >> that... > > > > > > This is what I remembered. When you responded to the email > > > for > > > the > > > first > > > time , I had a strong deja vu that you tried addressing this > > > issue > > > yourself in the past (commons-collectios4) - due to different > > > reason. > > > > > > > is there a specific conflict or problem (or a huge chain of > > dependencies) > > ? > > To me it seems the answer to both is no - > > This is the requirement list - > > java >= 1.5 > jpackage-utils > rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 > rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1 > rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 > rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) <= 5.2-1 > > > Probably a matter of packaging?
IIRC, Alon was the one who replied, and the issue was that Jboss included an old version (and we don't have classpath isolation, I guess)
Greg
We would like to avoid maintaining and package components that are not provider either by el6 or jboss distribution.
But based on other threads, it seems that I am the only one who remained trying to push compliance to the old ways, people feel that can maintain anything anywhere with no effort.
Regards, Alon
Alon, I disagree with your comment (about the "you're the only one" part :) )
+1
We have three (four if you include PatternFly) ongoing threads about dependency issues at the moment, and I hope we all realize that Alon is trying to do what's best for our project. I certainly empathize with him. He has a tough role, and there are a lot of us young'uns who want 'shiny new things' brought into the project. I certainly don't have the experience to know about all the long term costs of bringing in dependencies into an enterprise project like this -- but I'm learning :)
I don't think that motivation to introduce new dependencies is driven by desire to have "shiny new things" (we're not kids, right?) - I think that motivation is driven by actual needs, backed by potential value that might be broght in. For example, better/easier code due to newer version of library. I agree that we should avoid maintaining packages ourselves as much as we can, I think that everyone's in agreement with Alon on that.
As I wrote - I had a strong deja-vu about that the issue was already brought up. Now that you reminded , I don't think you're the only person who feels this way. I would also like to understand more what it means before jumping to conclusions and upgrading to collections4. At past I had some issues with another commons project (commons-configuration) that had different versions upstream and downstream.
I think collections4 is a nonstarter because it's not packaged for EL, IIUC.
I am sure the changes include not just "move to generics" and should carefully be considered.
If I may clarify, there would be at least two stipulations for introducing collections4.
1. someone else packages it and maintains it, available in Fedora and EL, long term. Quality package.
this is what missing, us maintaining a new package just to have more beautiful code is something that can be deferred for now.
2. JBoss has proper classloader isolation so that, even though JBoss uses collections3, a webapp can use collections4.
should not be a problem to use both.
I don't know the answer to either question :)
Seems like minimal gain to me, though.
Greg
_______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Thanks everyone for your thoughts. I would like to sum things up (as I understood from this thread) - a. We will defer the move to commons collections4. b. We should introduce some class renaming, not have LinqXXX c. Later on we can shift to an "already maintained" package. ----- Original Message -----
From: "Vojtech Szocs" <vszocs@redhat.com> To: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme@redhat.com> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2014 4:49:57 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
----- Original Message -----
From: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme@redhat.com> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> Cc: devel@ovirt.org Sent: Monday, August 25, 2014 1:52:44 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> Cc: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme@redhat.com>, "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org Sent: Sunday, August 24, 2014 9:51:31 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
----- Original Message -----
From: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> To: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme@redhat.com> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 11:36:31 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
----- Original Message -----
From: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme@redhat.com> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 11:33:09 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
----- Original Message -----
From: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> To: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme@redhat.com> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 4:20:19 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
----- Original Message ----- > From: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme@redhat.com> > To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> > Cc: "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org, "Alon > Bar-Lev" > <alonbl@redhat.com> > Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 8:39:54 PM > Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> > > To: "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com> > > Cc: devel@ovirt.org > > Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 8:39:31 PM > > Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com> > > > To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, "Yevgeny > > > Zaspitsky" > > > <yzaspits@redhat.com> > > > Cc: devel@ovirt.org > > > Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 12:25:52 AM > > > Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils > > > > > > On 08/21/2014 09:55 AM, Yair Zaslavsky wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > >> From: "Yevgeny Zaspitsky" <yzaspits@redhat.com> > > > >> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> > > > >> Cc: "Moti Asayag" <masayag@redhat.com>, "Allon Mureinik" > > > >> <amureini@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org > > > >> Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 4:35:33 PM > > > >> Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about > > > >> LinqUtils > > > >> > > > >> On 21/08/14 12:08, Yair Zaslavsky wrote: > > > >>> > > > >>> ----- Original Message ----- > > > >>>> From: "Yevgeny Zaspitsky" <yzaspits@redhat.com> > > > >>>> To: "Moti Asayag" <masayag@redhat.com> > > > >>>> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, "Allon > > > >>>> Mureinik" > > > >>>> <amureini@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org > > > >>>> Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 11:26:40 AM > > > >>>> Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about > > > >>>> LinqUtils > > > >>>> > > > >>>> It seems like we can try moving to common-collections4. > > > >>>> Yum > > > >>>> on > > > >>>> my > > > >>>> Fedora20 > > > >>>> computer finds apache-commons-collections4 package. > > > >>>> Fortunately > > > >>>> somebody > > > >>>> packed the jar into for a rpm for us. :-) > > > >>> What about RHEL 6.5? Can you please run a quick check? > > > >> Unfortunately my happiness was too hasty. Only Fedora > > > >> people > > > >> care > > > >> to > > > >> be > > > >> in the forward of the technology... The RHEL ones do not > > > >> care > > > >> about > > > >> that... > > > > > > > > This is what I remembered. When you responded to the email > > > > for > > > > the > > > > first > > > > time , I had a strong deja vu that you tried addressing > > > > this > > > > issue > > > > yourself in the past (commons-collectios4) - due to > > > > different > > > > reason. > > > > > > > > > > is there a specific conflict or problem (or a huge chain of > > > dependencies) > > > ? > > > > To me it seems the answer to both is no - > > > > This is the requirement list - > > > > java >= 1.5 > > jpackage-utils > > rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 > > rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1 > > rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 > > rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) <= 5.2-1 > > > > > > Probably a matter of packaging? > > IIRC, Alon was the one who replied, and the issue was that Jboss > included > an > old version (and we don't have classpath isolation, I guess) > > Greg >
We would like to avoid maintaining and package components that are not provider either by el6 or jboss distribution.
But based on other threads, it seems that I am the only one who remained trying to push compliance to the old ways, people feel that can maintain anything anywhere with no effort.
Regards, Alon
Alon, I disagree with your comment (about the "you're the only one" part :) )
+1
We have three (four if you include PatternFly) ongoing threads about dependency issues at the moment, and I hope we all realize that Alon is trying to do what's best for our project. I certainly empathize with him. He has a tough role, and there are a lot of us young'uns who want 'shiny new things' brought into the project. I certainly don't have the experience to know about all the long term costs of bringing in dependencies into an enterprise project like this -- but I'm learning :)
I don't think that motivation to introduce new dependencies is driven by desire to have "shiny new things" (we're not kids, right?) - I think that motivation is driven by actual needs, backed by potential value that might be broght in. For example, better/easier code due to newer version of library.
I agree that we should avoid maintaining packages ourselves as much as we can, I think that everyone's in agreement with Alon on that.
As I wrote - I had a strong deja-vu about that the issue was already brought up. Now that you reminded , I don't think you're the only person who feels this way. I would also like to understand more what it means before jumping to conclusions and upgrading to collections4. At past I had some issues with another commons project (commons-configuration) that had different versions upstream and downstream.
I think collections4 is a nonstarter because it's not packaged for EL, IIUC.
I am sure the changes include not just "move to generics" and should carefully be considered.
If I may clarify, there would be at least two stipulations for introducing collections4.
1. someone else packages it and maintains it, available in Fedora and EL, long term. Quality package.
this is what missing, us maintaining a new package just to have more beautiful code is something that can be deferred for now.
2. JBoss has proper classloader isolation so that, even though JBoss uses collections3, a webapp can use collections4.
should not be a problem to use both.
I don't know the answer to either question :)
Seems like minimal gain to me, though.
Greg
_______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On 08/29/2014 02:52 AM, Yair Zaslavsky wrote:
Thanks everyone for your thoughts. I would like to sum things up (as I understood from this thread) - a. We will defer the move to commons collections4. b. We should introduce some class renaming, not have LinqXXX
I think those renaming and general refactoring of compat should be a series of bugzilla's we should communicate as entry-level,low-hanging-fruits,you-name-it for new comers to ovirt.
c. Later on we can shift to an "already maintained" package.
I wonder how close we are to moving to java8 where all these dependencies (commonsX, LinqWhatever) could go to the waste bin. probably a mix of jboss/rhel/gwt.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Vojtech Szocs" <vszocs@redhat.com> To: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme@redhat.com> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2014 4:49:57 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
From: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme@redhat.com> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> Cc: devel@ovirt.org Sent: Monday, August 25, 2014 1:52:44 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> Cc: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme@redhat.com>, "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org Sent: Sunday, August 24, 2014 9:51:31 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
----- Original Message -----
From: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> To: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme@redhat.com> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 11:36:31 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
----- Original Message -----
From: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme@redhat.com> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 11:33:09 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
----- Original Message ----- > From: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> > To: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme@redhat.com> > Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, "Itamar Heim" > <iheim@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org > Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 4:20:19 PM > Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils > > > > ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme@redhat.com> >> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> >> Cc: "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org, "Alon >> Bar-Lev" >> <alonbl@redhat.com> >> Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 8:39:54 PM >> Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> >>> To: "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com> >>> Cc: devel@ovirt.org >>> Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 8:39:31 PM >>> Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils >>> >>> >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>> From: "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com> >>>> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, "Yevgeny >>>> Zaspitsky" >>>> <yzaspits@redhat.com> >>>> Cc: devel@ovirt.org >>>> Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 12:25:52 AM >>>> Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils >>>> >>>> On 08/21/2014 09:55 AM, Yair Zaslavsky wrote: >>>>> >>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>>> From: "Yevgeny Zaspitsky" <yzaspits@redhat.com> >>>>>> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> >>>>>> Cc: "Moti Asayag" <masayag@redhat.com>, "Allon Mureinik" >>>>>> <amureini@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org >>>>>> Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 4:35:33 PM >>>>>> Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about >>>>>> LinqUtils >>>>>> >>>>>> On 21/08/14 12:08, Yair Zaslavsky wrote: >>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>>>>> From: "Yevgeny Zaspitsky" <yzaspits@redhat.com> >>>>>>>> To: "Moti Asayag" <masayag@redhat.com> >>>>>>>> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, "Allon >>>>>>>> Mureinik" >>>>>>>> <amureini@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org >>>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 11:26:40 AM >>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about >>>>>>>> LinqUtils >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It seems like we can try moving to common-collections4. >>>>>>>> Yum >>>>>>>> on >>>>>>>> my >>>>>>>> Fedora20 >>>>>>>> computer finds apache-commons-collections4 package. >>>>>>>> Fortunately >>>>>>>> somebody >>>>>>>> packed the jar into for a rpm for us. :-) >>>>>>> What about RHEL 6.5? Can you please run a quick check? >>>>>> Unfortunately my happiness was too hasty. Only Fedora >>>>>> people >>>>>> care >>>>>> to >>>>>> be >>>>>> in the forward of the technology... The RHEL ones do not >>>>>> care >>>>>> about >>>>>> that... >>>>> This is what I remembered. When you responded to the email >>>>> for >>>>> the >>>>> first >>>>> time , I had a strong deja vu that you tried addressing >>>>> this >>>>> issue >>>>> yourself in the past (commons-collectios4) - due to >>>>> different >>>>> reason. >>>>> >>>> is there a specific conflict or problem (or a huge chain of >>>> dependencies) >>>> ? >>> To me it seems the answer to both is no - >>> >>> This is the requirement list - >>> >>> java >= 1.5 >>> jpackage-utils >>> rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 >>> rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1 >>> rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 >>> rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) <= 5.2-1 >>> >>> >>> Probably a matter of packaging? >> IIRC, Alon was the one who replied, and the issue was that Jboss >> included >> an >> old version (and we don't have classpath isolation, I guess) >> >> Greg >> > We would like to avoid maintaining and package components that are > not > provider either by el6 or jboss distribution. > > But based on other threads, it seems that I am the only one who > remained > trying to push compliance to the old ways, people feel that can > maintain > anything anywhere with no effort. > > Regards, > Alon Alon, I disagree with your comment (about the "you're the only one" part :) ) +1
We have three (four if you include PatternFly) ongoing threads about dependency issues at the moment, and I hope we all realize that Alon is trying to do what's best for our project. I certainly empathize with him. He has a tough role, and there are a lot of us young'uns who want 'shiny new things' brought into the project. I certainly don't have the experience to know about all the long term costs of bringing in dependencies into an enterprise project like this -- but I'm learning :) I don't think that motivation to introduce new dependencies is driven by desire to have "shiny new things" (we're not kids, right?) - I think that motivation is driven by actual needs, backed by potential value that might be broght in. For example, better/easier code due to newer version of
----- Original Message ----- library.
I agree that we should avoid maintaining packages ourselves as much as we can, I think that everyone's in agreement with Alon on that.
As I wrote - I had a strong deja-vu about that the issue was already brought up. Now that you reminded , I don't think you're the only person who feels this way. I would also like to understand more what it means before jumping to conclusions and upgrading to collections4. At past I had some issues with another commons project (commons-configuration) that had different versions upstream and downstream. I think collections4 is a nonstarter because it's not packaged for EL, IIUC.
I am sure the changes include not just "move to generics" and should carefully be considered.
If I may clarify, there would be at least two stipulations for introducing collections4.
1. someone else packages it and maintains it, available in Fedora and EL, long term. Quality package. this is what missing, us maintaining a new package just to have more beautiful code is something that can be deferred for now.
2. JBoss has proper classloader isolation so that, even though JBoss uses collections3, a webapp can use collections4. should not be a problem to use both.
I don't know the answer to either question :)
Seems like minimal gain to me, though.
Greg
Devel mailing list Devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Devel mailing list Devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
----- Original Message -----
From: "Roy Golan" <rgolan@redhat.com> To: devel@ovirt.org Sent: Wednesday, September 3, 2014 9:07:47 AM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
On 08/29/2014 02:52 AM, Yair Zaslavsky wrote:
Thanks everyone for your thoughts. I would like to sum things up (as I understood from this thread) - a. We will defer the move to commons collections4. b. We should introduce some class renaming, not have LinqXXX
I think those renaming and general refactoring of compat should be a series of bugzilla's we should communicate as entry-level,low-hanging-fruits,you-name-it for new comers to ovirt.
c. Later on we can shift to an "already maintained" package.
I wonder how close we are to moving to java8 where all these dependencies (commonsX, LinqWhatever) could go to the waste bin.
probably a mix of jboss/rhel/gwt.
During one of my lastest patches, I disovered there is also Linq in GWT code. sweet.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Vojtech Szocs" <vszocs@redhat.com> To: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme@redhat.com> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2014 4:49:57 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
From: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme@redhat.com> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> Cc: devel@ovirt.org Sent: Monday, August 25, 2014 1:52:44 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> Cc: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme@redhat.com>, "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org Sent: Sunday, August 24, 2014 9:51:31 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
----- Original Message -----
From: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> To: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme@redhat.com> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 11:36:31 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
----- Original Message ----- > From: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme@redhat.com> > To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> > Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, "Itamar Heim" > <iheim@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org > Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 11:33:09 PM > Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils > > > > ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> >> To: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme@redhat.com> >> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, "Itamar Heim" >> <iheim@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org >> Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 4:20:19 PM >> Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme@redhat.com> >>> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> >>> Cc: "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org, "Alon >>> Bar-Lev" >>> <alonbl@redhat.com> >>> Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 8:39:54 PM >>> Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils >>> >>> >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>> From: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> >>>> To: "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com> >>>> Cc: devel@ovirt.org >>>> Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 8:39:31 PM >>>> Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>> From: "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com> >>>>> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, "Yevgeny >>>>> Zaspitsky" >>>>> <yzaspits@redhat.com> >>>>> Cc: devel@ovirt.org >>>>> Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 12:25:52 AM >>>>> Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils >>>>> >>>>> On 08/21/2014 09:55 AM, Yair Zaslavsky wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>>>> From: "Yevgeny Zaspitsky" <yzaspits@redhat.com> >>>>>>> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> >>>>>>> Cc: "Moti Asayag" <masayag@redhat.com>, "Allon Mureinik" >>>>>>> <amureini@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org >>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 4:35:33 PM >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about >>>>>>> LinqUtils >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 21/08/14 12:08, Yair Zaslavsky wrote: >>>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>>>>>> From: "Yevgeny Zaspitsky" <yzaspits@redhat.com> >>>>>>>>> To: "Moti Asayag" <masayag@redhat.com> >>>>>>>>> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, "Allon >>>>>>>>> Mureinik" >>>>>>>>> <amureini@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org >>>>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 11:26:40 AM >>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about >>>>>>>>> LinqUtils >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> It seems like we can try moving to common-collections4. >>>>>>>>> Yum >>>>>>>>> on >>>>>>>>> my >>>>>>>>> Fedora20 >>>>>>>>> computer finds apache-commons-collections4 package. >>>>>>>>> Fortunately >>>>>>>>> somebody >>>>>>>>> packed the jar into for a rpm for us. :-) >>>>>>>> What about RHEL 6.5? Can you please run a quick check? >>>>>>> Unfortunately my happiness was too hasty. Only Fedora >>>>>>> people >>>>>>> care >>>>>>> to >>>>>>> be >>>>>>> in the forward of the technology... The RHEL ones do not >>>>>>> care >>>>>>> about >>>>>>> that... >>>>>> This is what I remembered. When you responded to the email >>>>>> for >>>>>> the >>>>>> first >>>>>> time , I had a strong deja vu that you tried addressing >>>>>> this >>>>>> issue >>>>>> yourself in the past (commons-collectios4) - due to >>>>>> different >>>>>> reason. >>>>>> >>>>> is there a specific conflict or problem (or a huge chain of >>>>> dependencies) >>>>> ? >>>> To me it seems the answer to both is no - >>>> >>>> This is the requirement list - >>>> >>>> java >= 1.5 >>>> jpackage-utils >>>> rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 >>>> rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1 >>>> rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 >>>> rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) <= 5.2-1 >>>> >>>> >>>> Probably a matter of packaging? >>> IIRC, Alon was the one who replied, and the issue was that Jboss >>> included >>> an >>> old version (and we don't have classpath isolation, I guess) >>> >>> Greg >>> >> We would like to avoid maintaining and package components that are >> not >> provider either by el6 or jboss distribution. >> >> But based on other threads, it seems that I am the only one who >> remained >> trying to push compliance to the old ways, people feel that can >> maintain >> anything anywhere with no effort. >> >> Regards, >> Alon Alon, I disagree with your comment (about the "you're the only one" part :) ) +1
We have three (four if you include PatternFly) ongoing threads about dependency issues at the moment, and I hope we all realize that Alon is trying to do what's best for our project. I certainly empathize with him. He has a tough role, and there are a lot of us young'uns who want 'shiny new things' brought into the project. I certainly don't have the experience to know about all the long term costs of bringing in dependencies into an enterprise project like this -- but I'm learning :) I don't think that motivation to introduce new dependencies is driven by desire to have "shiny new things" (we're not kids, right?) - I think that motivation is driven by actual needs, backed by potential value that might be broght in. For example, better/easier code due to newer version of
----- Original Message ----- library.
I agree that we should avoid maintaining packages ourselves as much as we can, I think that everyone's in agreement with Alon on that.
As I wrote - I had a strong deja-vu about that the issue was already brought up. Now that you reminded , I don't think you're the only person who feels this way. I would also like to understand more what it means before jumping to conclusions and upgrading to collections4. At past I had some issues with another commons project (commons-configuration) that had different versions upstream and downstream. I think collections4 is a nonstarter because it's not packaged for EL, IIUC.
I am sure the changes include not just "move to generics" and should carefully be considered.
> If I may clarify, there would be at least two stipulations for > introducing > collections4. > > 1. someone else packages it and maintains it, available in Fedora and > EL, > long term. Quality package. this is what missing, us maintaining a new package just to have more beautiful code is something that can be deferred for now.
> 2. JBoss has proper classloader isolation so that, even though JBoss > uses > collections3, a webapp can use collections4. should not be a problem to use both.
> I don't know the answer to either question :) > > Seems like minimal gain to me, though. > > Greg >
Devel mailing list Devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Devel mailing list Devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
_______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> To: "Roy Golan" <rgolan@redhat.com> Cc: devel@ovirt.org Sent: Wednesday, September 3, 2014 8:15:17 AM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
----- Original Message -----
From: "Roy Golan" <rgolan@redhat.com> To: devel@ovirt.org Sent: Wednesday, September 3, 2014 9:07:47 AM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
On 08/29/2014 02:52 AM, Yair Zaslavsky wrote:
Thanks everyone for your thoughts. I would like to sum things up (as I understood from this thread) - a. We will defer the move to commons collections4. b. We should introduce some class renaming, not have LinqXXX
I think those renaming and general refactoring of compat should be a series of bugzilla's we should communicate as entry-level,low-hanging-fruits,you-name-it for new comers to ovirt.
c. Later on we can shift to an "already maintained" package.
I wonder how close we are to moving to java8 where all these dependencies (commonsX, LinqWhatever) could go to the waste bin.
probably a mix of jboss/rhel/gwt.
During one of my lastest patches, I disovered there is also Linq in GWT code. sweet.
GWT client code org.ovirt.engine.ui.uicommonweb.Linq contains far more stuff than org.ovirt.engine.core.utils.linq.LinqUtils, including entity comparators and filter/finder methods. Perhaps these should be moved out of uicommonweb's Linq. GWT 2.6 supports Java 7. We already have an upgrade patch [1] for this. [1] http://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/c/32135/ GWT 3 (planned for late 2014 / early 2015) will likely support Java 8.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Vojtech Szocs" <vszocs@redhat.com> To: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme@redhat.com> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2014 4:49:57 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
From: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme@redhat.com> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> Cc: devel@ovirt.org Sent: Monday, August 25, 2014 1:52:44 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> Cc: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme@redhat.com>, "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org Sent: Sunday, August 24, 2014 9:51:31 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
----- Original Message ----- > From: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> > To: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme@redhat.com> > Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, "Itamar Heim" > <iheim@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org > Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 11:36:31 PM > Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils > > > > ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme@redhat.com> >> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> >> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, "Itamar Heim" >> <iheim@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org >> Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 11:33:09 PM >> Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> >>> To: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme@redhat.com> >>> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, "Itamar Heim" >>> <iheim@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org >>> Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 4:20:19 PM >>> Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils >>> >>> >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>> From: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme@redhat.com> >>>> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> >>>> Cc: "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org, "Alon >>>> Bar-Lev" >>>> <alonbl@redhat.com> >>>> Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 8:39:54 PM >>>> Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>> From: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> >>>>> To: "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com> >>>>> Cc: devel@ovirt.org >>>>> Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 8:39:31 PM >>>>> Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>>> From: "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com> >>>>>> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, "Yevgeny >>>>>> Zaspitsky" >>>>>> <yzaspits@redhat.com> >>>>>> Cc: devel@ovirt.org >>>>>> Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 12:25:52 AM >>>>>> Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils >>>>>> >>>>>> On 08/21/2014 09:55 AM, Yair Zaslavsky wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>>>>> From: "Yevgeny Zaspitsky" <yzaspits@redhat.com> >>>>>>>> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> >>>>>>>> Cc: "Moti Asayag" <masayag@redhat.com>, "Allon Mureinik" >>>>>>>> <amureini@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org >>>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 4:35:33 PM >>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about >>>>>>>> LinqUtils >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 21/08/14 12:08, Yair Zaslavsky wrote: >>>>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>>>>>>> From: "Yevgeny Zaspitsky" <yzaspits@redhat.com> >>>>>>>>>> To: "Moti Asayag" <masayag@redhat.com> >>>>>>>>>> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, "Allon >>>>>>>>>> Mureinik" >>>>>>>>>> <amureini@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org >>>>>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 11:26:40 AM >>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about >>>>>>>>>> LinqUtils >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> It seems like we can try moving to common-collections4. >>>>>>>>>> Yum >>>>>>>>>> on >>>>>>>>>> my >>>>>>>>>> Fedora20 >>>>>>>>>> computer finds apache-commons-collections4 package. >>>>>>>>>> Fortunately >>>>>>>>>> somebody >>>>>>>>>> packed the jar into for a rpm for us. :-) >>>>>>>>> What about RHEL 6.5? Can you please run a quick check? >>>>>>>> Unfortunately my happiness was too hasty. Only Fedora >>>>>>>> people >>>>>>>> care >>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>> be >>>>>>>> in the forward of the technology... The RHEL ones do not >>>>>>>> care >>>>>>>> about >>>>>>>> that... >>>>>>> This is what I remembered. When you responded to the email >>>>>>> for >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> first >>>>>>> time , I had a strong deja vu that you tried addressing >>>>>>> this >>>>>>> issue >>>>>>> yourself in the past (commons-collectios4) - due to >>>>>>> different >>>>>>> reason. >>>>>>> >>>>>> is there a specific conflict or problem (or a huge chain of >>>>>> dependencies) >>>>>> ? >>>>> To me it seems the answer to both is no - >>>>> >>>>> This is the requirement list - >>>>> >>>>> java >= 1.5 >>>>> jpackage-utils >>>>> rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 >>>>> rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1 >>>>> rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 >>>>> rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) <= 5.2-1 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Probably a matter of packaging? >>>> IIRC, Alon was the one who replied, and the issue was that Jboss >>>> included >>>> an >>>> old version (and we don't have classpath isolation, I guess) >>>> >>>> Greg >>>> >>> We would like to avoid maintaining and package components that are >>> not >>> provider either by el6 or jboss distribution. >>> >>> But based on other threads, it seems that I am the only one who >>> remained >>> trying to push compliance to the old ways, people feel that can >>> maintain >>> anything anywhere with no effort. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Alon Alon, I disagree with your comment (about the "you're the only one" part :) ) +1
We have three (four if you include PatternFly) ongoing threads about dependency issues at the moment, and I hope we all realize that Alon is trying to do what's best for our project. I certainly empathize with him. He has a tough role, and there are a lot of us young'uns who want 'shiny new things' brought into the project. I certainly don't have the experience to know about all the long term costs of bringing in dependencies into an enterprise project like this -- but I'm learning :) I don't think that motivation to introduce new dependencies is driven by desire to have "shiny new things" (we're not kids, right?) - I think
----- Original Message ----- that motivation is driven by actual needs, backed by potential value that might be broght in. For example, better/easier code due to newer version of library.
I agree that we should avoid maintaining packages ourselves as much as we can, I think that everyone's in agreement with Alon on that.
As I wrote - I had a strong deja-vu about that the issue was already brought up. Now that you reminded , I don't think you're the only person who feels this way. I would also like to understand more what it means before jumping to conclusions and upgrading to collections4. At past I had some issues with another commons project (commons-configuration) that had different versions upstream and downstream. I think collections4 is a nonstarter because it's not packaged for EL, IIUC.
I am sure the changes include not just "move to generics" and should carefully be considered.
>> If I may clarify, there would be at least two stipulations for >> introducing >> collections4. >> >> 1. someone else packages it and maintains it, available in Fedora >> and >> EL, >> long term. Quality package. > this is what missing, us maintaining a new package just to have more > beautiful code is something that can be deferred for now. > >> 2. JBoss has proper classloader isolation so that, even though JBoss >> uses >> collections3, a webapp can use collections4. > should not be a problem to use both. > >> I don't know the answer to either question :) >> >> Seems like minimal gain to me, though. >> >> Greg >>
Devel mailing list Devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Devel mailing list Devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
_______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
_______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
In general I think that LinqUtils should be deleted as soon as we move to Java 8 and be replaced by standard lambda expressions, that's what most of this class is doing anyway so it pretty much depends on when will we move to Java 8 to decide if it worth the effort now. On 08/21/2014 05:50 AM, Yair Zaslavsky wrote:
Hi Engine developers (and others :) ), I would like to share some thoughts & questions with you about the future of LinqUtils
1. Location of LinqUtils
Currently LinqUtils resides at utils. However, as LinqUtils contains some non engine related code, I think it should be moved to the new uutils (universal utils) project. uutils was introduced during the work on AAA, in order to provide a set of utilities that are not engine related, and hopefully in the future will be published as a separate artifcat on maven central (Alon, feel free to correct me here :) )
2. The name LinqUtils - Linq comes from c#. I think these days are way behind us (3 years or so now?) i would like to suggest renaming the class. CollectionUtils? Any other suggestions are more than welcome
Thanks, Yair _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tal Nisan" <tnisan@redhat.com> To: devel@ovirt.org Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 12:42:43 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ENGINE] thoughts about LinqUtils
In general I think that LinqUtils should be deleted as soon as we move to Java 8 and be replaced by standard lambda expressions, that's what most of this class is doing anyway so it pretty much depends on when will we move to Java 8 to decide if it worth the effort now.
I like your idea Tal, that's an interesting thought. Yes, indeed you can see some of the code could have been written more elegantly with Lambda
On 08/21/2014 05:50 AM, Yair Zaslavsky wrote:
Hi Engine developers (and others :) ), I would like to share some thoughts & questions with you about the future of LinqUtils
1. Location of LinqUtils
Currently LinqUtils resides at utils. However, as LinqUtils contains some non engine related code, I think it should be moved to the new uutils (universal utils) project. uutils was introduced during the work on AAA, in order to provide a set of utilities that are not engine related, and hopefully in the future will be published as a separate artifcat on maven central (Alon, feel free to correct me here :) )
2. The name LinqUtils - Linq comes from c#. I think these days are way behind us (3 years or so now?) i would like to suggest renaming the class. CollectionUtils? Any other suggestions are more than welcome
Thanks, Yair _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
_______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
participants (11)
-
Allon Mureinik -
Alon Bar-Lev -
Greg Sheremeta -
Itamar Heim -
Martin Perina -
Moti Asayag -
Roy Golan -
Tal Nisan -
Vojtech Szocs -
Yair Zaslavsky -
Yevgeny Zaspitsky