Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Update 3.0.yaml to use newArtifactId: instead of deprecated newArtifact: #236

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Jan 15, 2025

Conversation

@timtebeek
Copy link
Contributor Author

I guess it's good to consume the project you maintain from time to time; apologies for the breaking changes! 😅

Copy link
Member

@gsmet gsmet left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks!

@gsmet
Copy link
Member

gsmet commented Jan 15, 2025

@timtebeek I'm rather concerned by the license change of the entirety of https://github.com/openrewrite/rewrite-migrate-java/ . I can understand the point of view of Moderne regarding the advanced modernization recipes (not saying I like it but that's your choice as long as you respect the contributors IP) but even some basic building blocks like org.openrewrite.java.migrate.ChangeMethodInvocationReturnType, org.openrewrite.java.migrate.UpgradeJavaVersion, org.openrewrite.java.migrate.maven.UseMavenCompilerPluginReleaseConfiguration, or org.openrewrite.java.migrate.ReplaceStringLiteralValue are affected. And we are using them.

I suppose the move of RemoveMethodInvocations is part of the effort to improve the situation but I think there are others that need moving.

I think our recipes are built on what should be considered open basic building blocks (we don't really want to modernize the applications, just to upgrade them to a new Quarkus version, people can use OpenRewrite or Moderne by themselves if they are after modernization) and I'm not sure I'm comfortable updating to a new version until this is resolved and we don't end up using recipes under a new not OSI-approved license (well, to be perfectly honest, I'm sure I'm not comfortable doing it).

Happy to discuss it on a call if you feel like it.

@timtebeek
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hi @gsmet Appreciate your concern; know that for the purpose of this PR I've intentionally upgraded you to the last release that still used the Apache License for all the components, such that there should not be any hesitation accepting this particular changeset.

Perhaps indeed best to schedule a call to go over your concerns and figure out the best path forward; any day between ~11:00 and ~14:00 usually works for me, to feel free to send out an invite and we'll connect there.

@gsmet gsmet merged commit 2460a1a into quarkusio:main Jan 15, 2025
1 check passed
@timtebeek timtebeek deleted the patch-1 branch January 15, 2025 13:11
@timtebeek timtebeek mentioned this pull request Jan 20, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants