9:50 p.m.
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
1:04 a.m.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>
To: devel(a)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(a)ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
2:53 a.m.
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(a)redhat.com>
To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>
Cc: devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> To: devel(a)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(a)ovirt.org
> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>
_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list
Devel(a)ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
3:04 a.m.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Allon Mureinik" <amureini(a)redhat.com>
To: "Moti Asayag" <masayag(a)redhat.com>
Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>
> Cc: devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> > To: devel(a)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(a)ovirt.org
> > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Devel mailing list
> Devel(a)ovirt.org
> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>
3:16 a.m.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>
To: "Allon Mureinik" <amureini(a)redhat.com>
Cc: devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> To: "Moti Asayag" <masayag(a)redhat.com>
> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> > To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>
> > Cc: devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> > > To: devel(a)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(a)ovirt.org
> > > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Devel mailing list
> > Devel(a)ovirt.org
> > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> >
>
_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list
Devel(a)ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
3:18 a.m.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>
To: "Allon Mureinik" <amureini(a)redhat.com>
Cc: "Moti Asayag" <masayag(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)ovirt.org, "Yevgeny
Zaspitsky" <yzaspits(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> To: "Moti Asayag" <masayag(a)redhat.com>
> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> > To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>
> > Cc: devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> > > To: devel(a)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(a)ovirt.org
> > > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Devel mailing list
> > Devel(a)ovirt.org
> > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> >
>
3:26 a.m.
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(a)redhat.com>
To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>
Cc: "Allon Mureinik" <amureini(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)ovirt.org,
"Yevgeny Zaspitsky" <yzaspits(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> To: "Allon Mureinik" <amureini(a)redhat.com>
> Cc: "Moti Asayag" <masayag(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)ovirt.org,
"Yevgeny
> Zaspitsky" <yzaspits(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> > To: "Moti Asayag" <masayag(a)redhat.com>
> > Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> > > To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>
> > > Cc: devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> > > > To: devel(a)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(a)ovirt.org
> > > > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> > > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Devel mailing list
> > > Devel(a)ovirt.org
> > > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> > >
> >
>
4:08 a.m.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yevgeny Zaspitsky" <yzaspits(a)redhat.com>
To: "Moti Asayag" <masayag(a)redhat.com>
Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>, "Allon Mureinik"
<amureini(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>
> Cc: "Allon Mureinik" <amureini(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)ovirt.org,
"Yevgeny
> Zaspitsky" <yzaspits(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> > To: "Allon Mureinik" <amureini(a)redhat.com>
> > Cc: "Moti Asayag" <masayag(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)ovirt.org,
"Yevgeny
> > Zaspitsky" <yzaspits(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> > > To: "Moti Asayag" <masayag(a)redhat.com>
> > > Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>,
devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> > > > To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>
> > > > Cc: devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > To: devel(a)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(a)ovirt.org
> > > > > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> > > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Devel mailing list
> > > > Devel(a)ovirt.org
> > > > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
4:42 a.m.
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(a)ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
5:18 a.m.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tal Nisan" <tnisan(a)redhat.com>
To: devel(a)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(a)ovirt.org
> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list
Devel(a)ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
8:35 a.m.
On 21/08/14 12:08, Yair Zaslavsky wrote:
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Yevgeny Zaspitsky" <yzaspits(a)redhat.com>
> To: "Moti Asayag" <masayag(a)redhat.com>
> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>, "Allon
Mureinik" <amureini(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
>> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>
>> Cc: "Allon Mureinik" <amureini(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)ovirt.org,
"Yevgeny
>> Zaspitsky" <yzaspits(a)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(a)redhat.com>
>>> To: "Allon Mureinik" <amureini(a)redhat.com>
>>> Cc: "Moti Asayag" <masayag(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)ovirt.org,
"Yevgeny
>>> Zaspitsky" <yzaspits(a)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(a)redhat.com>
>>>> To: "Moti Asayag" <masayag(a)redhat.com>
>>>> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>,
devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
>>>>> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>
>>>>> Cc: devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
>>>>>> To: devel(a)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(a)ovirt.org
>>>>>> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Devel mailing list
>>>>> Devel(a)ovirt.org
>>>>> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>>>>>
8:55 a.m.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yevgeny Zaspitsky" <yzaspits(a)redhat.com>
To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>
Cc: "Moti Asayag" <masayag(a)redhat.com>, "Allon Mureinik"
<amureini(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
>> To: "Moti Asayag" <masayag(a)redhat.com>
>> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>, "Allon
Mureinik"
>> <amureini(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
>>> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>
>>> Cc: "Allon Mureinik" <amureini(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)ovirt.org,
"Yevgeny
>>> Zaspitsky" <yzaspits(a)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(a)redhat.com>
>>>> To: "Allon Mureinik" <amureini(a)redhat.com>
>>>> Cc: "Moti Asayag" <masayag(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)ovirt.org,
"Yevgeny
>>>> Zaspitsky" <yzaspits(a)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(a)redhat.com>
>>>>> To: "Moti Asayag" <masayag(a)redhat.com>
>>>>> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>,
devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
>>>>>> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>
>>>>>> Cc: devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
>>>>>>> To: devel(a)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(a)ovirt.org
>>>>>>> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Devel mailing list
>>>>>> Devel(a)ovirt.org
>>>>>> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>>>>>>
4:25 p.m.
On 08/21/2014 09:55 AM, Yair Zaslavsky wrote:
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Yevgeny Zaspitsky" <yzaspits(a)redhat.com>
> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>
> Cc: "Moti Asayag" <masayag(a)redhat.com>, "Allon Mureinik"
<amureini(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
>>> To: "Moti Asayag" <masayag(a)redhat.com>
>>> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>, "Allon
Mureinik"
>>> <amureini(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)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) ?
7:39 p.m.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Itamar Heim" <iheim(a)redhat.com>
To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>, "Yevgeny Zaspitsky"
<yzaspits(a)redhat.com>
Cc: devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
>> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>
>> Cc: "Moti Asayag" <masayag(a)redhat.com>, "Allon
Mureinik"
>> <amureini(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
>>>> To: "Moti Asayag" <masayag(a)redhat.com>
>>>> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>, "Allon
Mureinik"
>>>> <amureini(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)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?
12:39 p.m.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>
To: "Itamar Heim" <iheim(a)redhat.com>
Cc: devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>, "Yevgeny
Zaspitsky"
> <yzaspits(a)redhat.com>
> Cc: devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> >> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>
> >> Cc: "Moti Asayag" <masayag(a)redhat.com>, "Allon
Mureinik"
> >> <amureini(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> >>>> To: "Moti Asayag" <masayag(a)redhat.com>
> >>>> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>,
"Allon Mureinik"
> >>>> <amureini(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)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
3:20 p.m.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme(a)redhat.com>
To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>
Cc: "Itamar Heim" <iheim(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)ovirt.org, "Alon
Bar-Lev" <alonbl(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> To: "Itamar Heim" <iheim(a)redhat.com>
> Cc: devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> > To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>, "Yevgeny
Zaspitsky"
> > <yzaspits(a)redhat.com>
> > Cc: devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> > >> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>
> > >> Cc: "Moti Asayag" <masayag(a)redhat.com>, "Allon
Mureinik"
> > >> <amureini(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> > >>>> To: "Moti Asayag" <masayag(a)redhat.com>
> > >>>> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>,
"Allon Mureinik"
> > >>>> <amureini(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)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
3:33 p.m.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl(a)redhat.com>
To: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme(a)redhat.com>
Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>, "Itamar Heim"
<iheim(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>
> Cc: "Itamar Heim" <iheim(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)ovirt.org, "Alon
Bar-Lev"
> <alonbl(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> > To: "Itamar Heim" <iheim(a)redhat.com>
> > Cc: devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> > > To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>, "Yevgeny
Zaspitsky"
> > > <yzaspits(a)redhat.com>
> > > Cc: devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> > > >> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>
> > > >> Cc: "Moti Asayag" <masayag(a)redhat.com>,
"Allon Mureinik"
> > > >> <amureini(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> > > >>>> To: "Moti Asayag" <masayag(a)redhat.com>
> > > >>>> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky"
<yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>, "Allon Mureinik"
> > > >>>> <amureini(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)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
3:36 p.m.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme(a)redhat.com>
To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl(a)redhat.com>
Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>, "Itamar Heim"
<iheim(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> To: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme(a)redhat.com>
> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>, "Itamar Heim"
> <iheim(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> > To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>
> > Cc: "Itamar Heim" <iheim(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)ovirt.org,
"Alon Bar-Lev"
> > <alonbl(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> > > To: "Itamar Heim" <iheim(a)redhat.com>
> > > Cc: devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> > > > To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>,
"Yevgeny Zaspitsky"
> > > > <yzaspits(a)redhat.com>
> > > > Cc: devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> > > > >> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>
> > > > >> Cc: "Moti Asayag" <masayag(a)redhat.com>,
"Allon Mureinik"
> > > > >> <amureini(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> > > > >>>> To: "Moti Asayag"
<masayag(a)redhat.com>
> > > > >>>> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky"
<yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>, "Allon Mureinik"
> > > > >>>> <amureini(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)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
8:51 p.m.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl(a)redhat.com>
To: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme(a)redhat.com>
Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>, "Itamar Heim"
<iheim(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl(a)redhat.com>
> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>, "Itamar Heim"
> <iheim(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> > To: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme(a)redhat.com>
> > Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>, "Itamar
Heim"
> > <iheim(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> > > To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>
> > > Cc: "Itamar Heim" <iheim(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)ovirt.org,
"Alon Bar-Lev"
> > > <alonbl(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> > > > To: "Itamar Heim" <iheim(a)redhat.com>
> > > > Cc: devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>,
"Yevgeny Zaspitsky"
> > > > > <yzaspits(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > Cc: devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > >> To: "Yair Zaslavsky"
<yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > >> Cc: "Moti Asayag" <masayag(a)redhat.com>,
"Allon Mureinik"
> > > > > >> <amureini(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > >>>> To: "Moti Asayag"
<masayag(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > >>>> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky"
<yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>, "Allon Mureinik"
> > > > > >>>> <amureini(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)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
>
6:52 a.m.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>
To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl(a)redhat.com>
Cc: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme(a)redhat.com>, "Itamar Heim"
<iheim(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> To: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme(a)redhat.com>
> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>, "Itamar Heim"
> <iheim(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> > To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl(a)redhat.com>
> > Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>, "Itamar
Heim"
> > <iheim(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> > > To: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme(a)redhat.com>
> > > Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>, "Itamar
Heim"
> > > <iheim(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> > > > To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>
> > > > Cc: "Itamar Heim" <iheim(a)redhat.com>,
devel(a)ovirt.org, "Alon Bar-Lev"
> > > > <alonbl(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > To: "Itamar Heim" <iheim(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > Cc: devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > > To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>,
"Yevgeny Zaspitsky"
> > > > > > <yzaspits(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > > Cc: devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > > >> To: "Yair Zaslavsky"
<yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > > >> Cc: "Moti Asayag"
<masayag(a)redhat.com>, "Allon Mureinik"
> > > > > > >> <amureini(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > > >>>> To: "Moti Asayag"
<masayag(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > > >>>> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky"
<yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>, "Allon Mureinik"
> > > > > > >>>> <amureini(a)redhat.com>,
devel(a)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
> >
>
8:49 a.m.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme(a)redhat.com>
To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>
Cc: devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl(a)redhat.com>
> Cc: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme(a)redhat.com>, "Itamar Heim"
> <iheim(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> > To: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme(a)redhat.com>
> > Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>, "Itamar
Heim"
> > <iheim(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> > > To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl(a)redhat.com>
> > > Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>, "Itamar
Heim"
> > > <iheim(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> > > > To: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme(a)redhat.com>
> > > > Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>,
"Itamar Heim"
> > > > <iheim(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > Cc: "Itamar Heim" <iheim(a)redhat.com>,
devel(a)ovirt.org, "Alon
> > > > > Bar-Lev"
> > > > > <alonbl(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > > To: "Itamar Heim" <iheim(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > > Cc: devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > > > To: "Yair Zaslavsky"
<yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>, "Yevgeny Zaspitsky"
> > > > > > > <yzaspits(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > > > Cc: devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > > > >> To: "Yair Zaslavsky"
<yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > > > >> Cc: "Moti Asayag"
<masayag(a)redhat.com>, "Allon Mureinik"
> > > > > > > >> <amureini(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > > > >>>> To: "Moti Asayag"
<masayag(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > > > >>>> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky"
<yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>, "Allon
> > > > > > > >>>> Mureinik"
> > > > > > > >>>> <amureini(a)redhat.com>,
devel(a)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(a)ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
6:52 p.m.
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(a)redhat.com>
To: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme(a)redhat.com>
Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>
> Cc: devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> > To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl(a)redhat.com>
> > Cc: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme(a)redhat.com>, "Itamar
Heim"
> > <iheim(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> > > To: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme(a)redhat.com>
> > > Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>, "Itamar
Heim"
> > > <iheim(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> > > > To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl(a)redhat.com>
> > > > Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>,
"Itamar Heim"
> > > > <iheim(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > To: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>,
"Itamar Heim"
> > > > > <iheim(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > > To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > > Cc: "Itamar Heim" <iheim(a)redhat.com>,
devel(a)ovirt.org, "Alon
> > > > > > Bar-Lev"
> > > > > > <alonbl(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > > > To: "Itamar Heim" <iheim(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > > > Cc: devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > > > > To: "Yair Zaslavsky"
<yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>, "Yevgeny
> > > > > > > > Zaspitsky"
> > > > > > > > <yzaspits(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > > > > Cc: devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > > > > >> To: "Yair Zaslavsky"
<yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > > > > >> Cc: "Moti Asayag"
<masayag(a)redhat.com>, "Allon Mureinik"
> > > > > > > > >> <amureini(a)redhat.com>,
devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > > > > >>>> To: "Moti Asayag"
<masayag(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > > > > >>>> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky"
<yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>, "Allon
> > > > > > > > >>>> Mureinik"
> > > > > > > > >>>> <amureini(a)redhat.com>,
devel(a)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(a)ovirt.org
> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>
1:07 a.m.
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(a)redhat.com>
> To: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme(a)redhat.com>
> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
>> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>
>> Cc: devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
>>> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl(a)redhat.com>
>>> Cc: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme(a)redhat.com>, "Itamar
Heim"
>>> <iheim(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
>>>> To: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme(a)redhat.com>
>>>> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>, "Itamar
Heim"
>>>> <iheim(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
>>>>> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl(a)redhat.com>
>>>>> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>,
"Itamar Heim"
>>>>> <iheim(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
>>>>>> To: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme(a)redhat.com>
>>>>>> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>,
"Itamar Heim"
>>>>>> <iheim(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
>>>>>>> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>
>>>>>>> Cc: "Itamar Heim" <iheim(a)redhat.com>,
devel(a)ovirt.org, "Alon
>>>>>>> Bar-Lev"
>>>>>>> <alonbl(a)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(a)redhat.com>
>>>>>>>> To: "Itamar Heim" <iheim(a)redhat.com>
>>>>>>>> Cc: devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
>>>>>>>>> To: "Yair Zaslavsky"
<yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>, "Yevgeny
>>>>>>>>> Zaspitsky"
>>>>>>>>> <yzaspits(a)redhat.com>
>>>>>>>>> Cc: devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
>>>>>>>>>>> To: "Yair Zaslavsky"
<yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>
>>>>>>>>>>> Cc: "Moti Asayag"
<masayag(a)redhat.com>, "Allon Mureinik"
>>>>>>>>>>> <amureini(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> To: "Moti Asayag"
<masayag(a)redhat.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky"
<yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>, "Allon
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mureinik"
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <amureini(a)redhat.com>,
devel(a)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(a)ovirt.org
>> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>>
_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list
Devel(a)ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
1:15 a.m.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Roy Golan" <rgolan(a)redhat.com>
To: devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
>> To: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme(a)redhat.com>
>> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
>>> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>
>>> Cc: devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
>>>> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl(a)redhat.com>
>>>> Cc: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme(a)redhat.com>, "Itamar
Heim"
>>>> <iheim(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
>>>>> To: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme(a)redhat.com>
>>>>> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>,
"Itamar Heim"
>>>>> <iheim(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
>>>>>> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl(a)redhat.com>
>>>>>> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>,
"Itamar Heim"
>>>>>> <iheim(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
>>>>>>> To: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme(a)redhat.com>
>>>>>>> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>,
"Itamar Heim"
>>>>>>> <iheim(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
>>>>>>>> To: "Yair Zaslavsky"
<yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>
>>>>>>>> Cc: "Itamar Heim" <iheim(a)redhat.com>,
devel(a)ovirt.org, "Alon
>>>>>>>> Bar-Lev"
>>>>>>>> <alonbl(a)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(a)redhat.com>
>>>>>>>>> To: "Itamar Heim"
<iheim(a)redhat.com>
>>>>>>>>> Cc: devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
>>>>>>>>>> To: "Yair Zaslavsky"
<yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>, "Yevgeny
>>>>>>>>>> Zaspitsky"
>>>>>>>>>> <yzaspits(a)redhat.com>
>>>>>>>>>> Cc: devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>> To: "Yair Zaslavsky"
<yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Cc: "Moti Asayag"
<masayag(a)redhat.com>, "Allon Mureinik"
>>>>>>>>>>>> <amureini(a)redhat.com>,
devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To: "Moti Asayag"
<masayag(a)redhat.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky"
<yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>, "Allon
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mureinik"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <amureini(a)redhat.com>,
devel(a)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(a)ovirt.org
>>> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>>>
> _______________________________________________
> Devel mailing list
> Devel(a)ovirt.org
> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list
Devel(a)ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
11:36 a.m.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>
To: "Roy Golan" <rgolan(a)redhat.com>
Cc: devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> To: devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> >> To: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme(a)redhat.com>
> >> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>,
devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> >>> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>
> >>> Cc: devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> >>>> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl(a)redhat.com>
> >>>> Cc: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme(a)redhat.com>,
"Itamar Heim"
> >>>> <iheim(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> >>>>> To: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme(a)redhat.com>
> >>>>> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>,
"Itamar Heim"
> >>>>> <iheim(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> >>>>>> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl(a)redhat.com>
> >>>>>> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>,
"Itamar Heim"
> >>>>>> <iheim(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> >>>>>>> To: "Greg Sheremeta"
<gshereme(a)redhat.com>
> >>>>>>> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky"
<yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>, "Itamar Heim"
> >>>>>>> <iheim(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> >>>>>>>> To: "Yair Zaslavsky"
<yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>
> >>>>>>>> Cc: "Itamar Heim"
<iheim(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)ovirt.org, "Alon
> >>>>>>>> Bar-Lev"
> >>>>>>>> <alonbl(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> >>>>>>>>> To: "Itamar Heim"
<iheim(a)redhat.com>
> >>>>>>>>> Cc: devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> >>>>>>>>>> To: "Yair Zaslavsky"
<yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>, "Yevgeny
> >>>>>>>>>> Zaspitsky"
> >>>>>>>>>> <yzaspits(a)redhat.com>
> >>>>>>>>>> Cc: devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> To: "Yair Zaslavsky"
<yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Cc: "Moti Asayag"
<masayag(a)redhat.com>, "Allon Mureinik"
> >>>>>>>>>>>> <amureini(a)redhat.com>,
devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> To: "Moti Asayag"
<masayag(a)redhat.com>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cc: "Yair
Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>, "Allon
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mureinik"
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
<amureini(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)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(a)ovirt.org
> >>> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> >>>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Devel mailing list
> > Devel(a)ovirt.org
> > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>
> _______________________________________________
> Devel mailing list
> Devel(a)ovirt.org
> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>
_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list
Devel(a)ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
3500
days inactive
3529
days old
24 comments
11 participants
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