+1

On Tue, Dec 19, 2023 at 11:38 AM Tibor Zimányi <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I think it is hard to compare with Spring Boot, because Spring is the most
> used framework with much bigger market share than Quarkus. The focus on
> Quarkus from the past (before KIE in Apache) was driven by internal company
> decisions, not market share. But this is getting a bit off topic, sorry for
> that.
>
> I think the most important thing is to take into account, if we have a
> maintainer for a piece of code. For the case of Mongo, if there is someone
> willing to maintain it, then it is fine. Same should apply for other parts
> of the codebase. Leaving something part of the release because there are
> users for it may be a good reason, however without maintainers of that
> code, it will get obsolete quickly and be a security nightmare too. I think
> that is not a good message for those users. So I would say, to move this
> discussion forward, we may need a list of things proposed to be removed
> from the release, and if there is an objection, there should be some
> volunteer, who openly declares, that they want to maintain that part of the
> codebase.
>
> What do you think about this please?
>
> Best regards,
> Tibor
>
>
> Dňa ut 19. 12. 2023, 11:18 Francisco Javier Tirado Sarti <
> [email protected]> napísal(a):
>
> > Ricardo, for images I fully agree we should only include postgresql
> stuff.
> > I think we need to separate the image content from the repo content.
> > We can even select what we want to test in our CI, through maven
> profiles.
> > What I want to avoid, given the changing priorities, is to remove some
> > stuff that will be useful later. In the case of Mongo, since there are
> > active users, I'm pretty sure it will come up again. In the case of
> > Infinispan, I'm pretty sure it won't come up again, so we can move to a
> > legacy repo.
> > That's the same rationale we used for not removing springboot stuff when
> we
> > decided to focus only on quarkus.
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 18, 2023 at 4:33 PM ricardo zanini fernandes <
> > [email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > I think keeping a few addons in a "sandbox" shows the right message to
> > the
> > > community and we can even have a governance model that updates the
> state
> > of
> > > such components. We can even keep them in the same repository, in a
> > > "sandbox" profile so we won't add too much maintenance effort. From the
> > > image's perspective, it's hard to maintain too many flavors since it
> > > demands infra resources to build and keep the bits in the image
> registry.
> > > If it's not being used based on metrics (pulls from outside, for
> > instance),
> > > we should ditch them.
> > >
> > > In a nutshell what I propose:
> > >
> > > - List the addons/libs we want to support (ex postgres)
> > > - List the addons/libs that can be in a sandbox model (ex MongoDB)
> > > - List the addons/libs we want to ditch (ex infinispan)
> > >
> > > Then, we add support for images that are only in the first list.
> > >
> > > If a sandbox component gains enough traction, we can promote it to a
> > > "supported" addon.
> > >
> > > Cheers!
> > >
> > > On Mon, Dec 18, 2023 at 12:04 PM Francisco Javier Tirado Sarti <
> > > [email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > As mentioned before, currently I'm working at DataIndex persistence
> to
> > > > increase performance (avoiding a lot of updates when using
> Postgresql).
> > > > This requires changes in the interface used between indexing and
> > storage,
> > > > and it affects MongoDB, Infinispan and Oracle implementations, not
> only
> > > > Postgres. So, in a way, I'm committed to ensuring all of them are
> still
> > > > working (I'm currently changing them to achieve that), although I'm
> > > putting
> > > > more emphasis on optimizing the postgres one.
> > > > I think we agree that, overall, we should remove those bits which we
> > are
> > > > not interested in, based on technical merits, not on circunstancial
> > > > availability of resources or changing company priorities.
> > > > For example, I'm for removing Infinispan because I do not think it
> is a
> > > > good technology to implement GraphQL capabilities, but keeping
> > relational
> > > > and Mongo, because both suit the scenario. Obviously, if keeping
> > MongoDB
> > > > was an unaffordable burden, we should reevaluate, but currently, as
> far
> > > as
> > > > I know, it is not.
> > > > I'm always talking from a community perspective, from our product,
> > which
> > > is
> > > > based on Postgres, we should just not include that addon on the
> image.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Dec 18, 2023 at 3:15 PM Alex Porcelli <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Francisco,
> > > > >
> > > > > This discussion should provide enough heads-up, and community
> members
> > > > > should be able to engage in this ML to express their concerns.
> > > > >
> > > > > But as I wrote before, this is not about the user's perspective,
> it's
> > > > > about active development and focus.
> > > > >
> > > > > So far in this thread there's some push back to remove components,
> > but
> > > > > no commitment from anyone to keep investing in their development.
> If
> > > > > you, Debabrata and any other are committed to maintain any specific
> > > > > component proposed to be removed, the discussion might have a
> better
> > > > > chance to be preserved.
> > > > >
> > > > > So far, I saw and heard more concerns from active committers about
> > the
> > > > > shared burden to carry over those components and the overall impact
> > of
> > > > > keeping those.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, Dec 18, 2023 at 9:05 AM Francisco Javier Tirado Sarti
> > > > > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Alex, we know the team one of the most active community
> > contributors
> > > on
> > > > > > Zulip ( Debabrata Patnaik) is using MongoDB for their product.
> > > > > > So removing that without a previous warning will not be welcomed.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Mon, Dec 18, 2023 at 2:31 PM Alex Porcelli <
> [email protected]
> > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > The question is not about usage, but the effort to keep
> > components
> > > > > > > that haven't been actively maintained.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The components suggested (including MongoDB) haven’t been
> > actively
> > > > > > > developed and keeping those for the 10 release might send the
> > wrong
> > > > > message
> > > > > > > regarding continued investment and focus.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Maybe not releasing then creates an opportunity to hear
> community
> > > > > feedback,
> > > > > > > that might end up helping us prioritize areas of investments.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Mon, Dec 18, 2023 at 7:59 AM Tristan Radisson <
> > > > [email protected]
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > My 2 cents:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I think we should keep MongoDB implementation.
> > > > > > > > As far as I remember from Zulip, there are quite some people
> > > using
> > > > > it.
> > > > > > > > Others are less important.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Mon, Dec 18, 2023 at 12:38 PM Tibor Zimányi <
> > > > [email protected]>
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Hi everyone,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I was about to write something similar as Enrique. There
> are
> > > two
> > > > > > > aspects
> > > > > > > > > now:
> > > > > > > > > - What should we release as part of 10?
> > > > > > > > > - What should be part of the release in the future?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I agree, it might be better to start with a minimal set in
> 10
> > > to
> > > > > reduce
> > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > maintenance costs and then we could build on top of that.
> > Part
> > > of
> > > > > > > > kiegroup
> > > > > > > > > in the past was the experimental nature, where we had
> > multiple
> > > > > smaller
> > > > > > > > > projects, that ended in the community, however later they
> > just
> > > > > become a
> > > > > > > > > maintenance burden (even if used for a very small set of
> use
> > > > > cases) -
> > > > > > > > > remember e.g. droolsjbpm-integration repository, Fuse
> > > integration
> > > > > etc.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Best regards,
> > > > > > > > > Tibor
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Dňa po 18. 12. 2023, 12:23 Enrique Gonzalez Martinez <
> > > > > > > > [email protected]
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > napísal(a):
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I do agree in removing or at least setting aside those
> > > > > componentes
> > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > > are
> > > > > > > > > > not our primary focus.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > As Alex suggested this increases the overhead and we
> don' t
> > > > > really
> > > > > > > have
> > > > > > > > > > many hands for now.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I would say that if we don't agree in remove them, at
> least
> > > > move
> > > > > > > those
> > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > another repo outside the apache kie. That will make
> > > > > > > > > > 1. Its influence won't be a burden to any calls that
> needs
> > to
> > > > be
> > > > > made
> > > > > > > > > > regarding codebase.
> > > > > > > > > > 2. It is better start with a minimal set of funcional
> > things
> > > > > working
> > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > > let it grow by need than try to do too much.
> > > > > > > > > > 3. Reduce the effort / expertise require to sustain the
> > > > codebase.
> > > > > > > > > > 4. Shift the effort to general use cases that are more
> > likely
> > > > to
> > > > > be
> > > > > > > > used
> > > > > > > > > by
> > > > > > > > > > users.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > El lun, 18 dic 2023, 12:05, Alex Porcelli <
> > [email protected]>
> > > > > > > escribió:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > There’s no proposal yet, this is just a discussion…
> it’s
> > > > > expected
> > > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > > > > proposal will emerge from here.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > The discussion is an invite to revisit the complex
> matrix
> > > of
> > > > > > > > > > dependencies +
> > > > > > > > > > > any codebase that hasn’t been much maintained that
> could
> > be
> > > > > cleaned
> > > > > > > > up.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Now to be more specific to persistence, it’s clear that
> > all
> > > > > > > > investments
> > > > > > > > > > has
> > > > > > > > > > > been focused mostly on Postgres. If Oracle has been
> > > properly
> > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > actively
> > > > > > > > > > > maintained it’s also a good candidate to be kept.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Dec 18, 2023 at 5:59 AM Francisco Javier Tirado
> > > > Sarti <
> > > > > > > > > > > [email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > But in order to be more precise about what we are
> > > > > discussing, I
> > > > > > > > guess
> > > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > proposal (at least part of it) is to keep only one
> > > > > implementation
> > > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > > > > persistence for data index, the postgresql one. Is my
> > > > > > > understanding
> > > > > > > > > > > > correct?
> > > > > > > > > > > > Or keep Oracle and Postgresql and remove Infinipan
> and
> > > > > MongoDB?
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Dec 18, 2023 at 11:54 AM Francisco Javier
> > Tirado
> > > > > Sarti <
> > > > > > > > > > > > [email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > I think my point is that value is not that marginal
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Dec 18, 2023 at 11:53 AM Alex Porcelli <
> > > > > > > > > [email protected]>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> Francisco,
> > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> The question is not about the potential value
> those
> > > > > components
> > > > > > > > > > > provide…
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> it’s about the cost associated to maintain those
> for
> > > the
> > > > > > > > marginal
> > > > > > > > > > > value
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> they provide.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> There’s a ripple effect for every component we
> carry
> > > > over,
> > > > > > > > adding
> > > > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> complex
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> matrix of additional resources to be managed like
> > > > > container
> > > > > > > > > images,
> > > > > > > > > > > CVEs
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> associated with them (and their transient
> > > dependencies)
> > > > +
> > > > > all
> > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > extra
> > > > > > > > > > > > CI
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> time to build the matrix.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> On Mon, Dec 18, 2023 at 5:05 AM Francisco Javier
> > > Tirado
> > > > > Sarti
> > > > > > > <
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> [email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > Anyway, I'm currently refactoring data index
> > > > > persistence,
> > > > > > > > > > including
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> changes
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > in Storage interface (shared with trusty), so
> > maybe
> > > we
> > > > > > > should
> > > > > > > > > > table
> > > > > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > discussion after that PR is done. Although
> > removing
> > > > > > > infinispan
> > > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> MongoDB
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > will save me substantial work, I truly believe
> > > keeping
> > > > > them
> > > > > > > > adds
> > > > > > > > > > > value
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> to
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > our platform, so I still vote for keeping.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > On Mon, Dec 18, 2023 at 11:02 AM Francisco
> Javier
> > > > Tirado
> > > > > > > > Sarti <
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > [email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > I think having "secondary" addons that
> > illustrate
> > > > > platform
> > > > > > > > > > > extension
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > capabilities beyond the one we are
> prioritizing:
> > > > > > > postgresql
> > > > > > > > > is a
> > > > > > > > > > > > great
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > value.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > Therefore I vote for keeping them, except
> maybe
> > > > > > > Infinispan.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > On Sun, Dec 17, 2023 at 6:49 PM Alex Porcelli
> <
> > > > > > > > > > > [email protected]>
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > >> As we gear up for the much-anticipated 10.0.0
> > > > > release, I
> > > > > > > > > invite
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > >> everyone to a crucial discussion about
> refining
> > > our
> > > > > > > > codebase.
> > > > > > > > > > > This
> > > > > > > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > >> not just about what we're adding but also
> about
> > > > what
> > > > > we
> > > > > > > > might
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> consider
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > >> removing or changing for the better.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > >> The following are initial suggestions for
> > > > components
> > > > > we
> > > > > > > > might
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> deprecate:
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > >> - Infinispan
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > >> - MongoDB
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > >> - Redis
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > >> - Elastic
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > >> However, this list is just a starting point.
> I
> > > > > encourage
> > > > > > > > each
> > > > > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > > > > you
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > >> to contribute your thoughts. If there are
> other
> > > > > > > components
> > > > > > > > > you
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> believe
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > >> should be on this list, please bring them
> > > forward.
> > > > > > > > Likewise,
> > > > > > > > > if
> > > > > > > > > > > any
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> of
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > >> the listed components should remain, your
> input
> > > is
> > > > > > > equally
> > > > > > > > > > > > valuable.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > >> Explain your reasons so we can all understand
> > the
> > > > > > > benefits
> > > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > > > > keeping
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > >> them.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > >> The TrustyAI codebase is also up for
> > discussion.
> > > It
> > > > > > > hasn't
> > > > > > > > > > been a
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > >> primary focus for a while, and while I see
> some
> > > > > potential
> > > > > > > > in
> > > > > > > > > > it,
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > >> setting it aside might be more practical for
> > now.
> > > > But
> > > > > > > > > remember,
> > > > > > > > > > > no
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > >> decision here is permanent. We can always
> > revisit
> > > > any
> > > > > > > > > > component,
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > >> especially if there's a collective interest
> in
> > > its
> > > > > > > > > maintenance
> > > > > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > >> development.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > >> Your opinions and expertise are vital in this
> > > > > process.
> > > > > > > > Let's
> > > > > > > > > > work
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > >> together to make these decisions unanimously,
> > > > > ensuring
> > > > > > > our
> > > > > > > > > > > > project's
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > >> long-term success and manageability.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > >> -
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > >> Alex
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> > > > > [email protected]
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > >> For additional commands, e-mail:
> > > > > [email protected]
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to