-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4k
Commit
This commit does not belong to any branch on this repository, and may belong to a fork outside of the repository.
Update to JHipster dependencies 3.0.0 stable release
- Loading branch information
Showing
3 changed files
with
2 additions
and
15 deletions.
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
d3da18a
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@jdubois @pascalgrimaud Should we now update bom to 3.0.1-SNAPSHOT and update generator to use it?
From the current experience we detect sooner if there is impacts due to the lack of builds in jhipster bom project...
d3da18a
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@DanielFran : yes, we can use master branch of JHipster dependencies. This afternoon, I suggested to Julien to use 'release' to be sure the build passed with the dependencies from Maven Central.
d3da18a
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@pascalgrimaud I have already the PR done for both projects.
Should I add again the reference to "oss.sonatype.org-snapshot"?
d3da18a
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think we need this, right ?
d3da18a
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Only if @jdubois create snapshots of jhipster-bom...
d3da18a
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Since it is not automated, I do not know?
We can add it after...
d3da18a
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
it is still done manually, today :-)
d3da18a
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
So not needed for now!
I will merge PRs, and Julien can add it after if needed to users who do not want to compile jhipster-bom locally...
d3da18a
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
SNAPSHOTS can't be automated, as far as I know, as I need to sign them with PGP.
Anyway we're on a stable release now, there's no need to use SNAPSHOTS at the moment anymore.
d3da18a
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@jdubois I was looking into this a couple of days got but never got a chance to mention that there is a way to actually automate the release of snapshots(as this has caused some issues during beta) and found the following very good articles on how to set this up:
I realize that this might be a bit more work to setup(although you may have done most of the work already) but believe it will eventually save you a lot of time in the future
d3da18a
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
As you said @pvliss, it's a lot of work to set up it correctly.
It was discussed long time ago, about splitting to jhipster-dependencies, because it will be less work for us, to maintain. Because it should be 'stable', no need to change it every day.
The more we work on the project, the more we have so synchronize between all different repos. In my opinion, it was less work when we were with mono repo, like suggested by @PierreBesson.
As @jdubois said :
Can't we stay on stable release and wait feedback from users ?
d3da18a
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Well when I read the articles I thought that most of the steps should have already been done by @jdubois and it mainly is a matter of slightly modifying
travis.yml
and using tracis-cli to configure Travis properly but I might be terribly wrong :)Agreed that using a released version is currently the easiest and fastest thing to do but it might be a problem again in the future when we need to avoid messing up with the stable release.
Anyways, you guys have way more experience than I do and I am sure you will choose what's best for the project. Simply wanted to note that it is possible to configure Travis for such a use case. If its worth it, is up for you to judge.