Where communities thrive


  • Join over 1.5M+ people
  • Join over 100K+ communities
  • Free without limits
  • Create your own community
People
Repo info
Activity
  • Jun 29 22:14
    dnfadmin commented #2006
  • Jun 29 22:14
    dnfadmin commented #2006
  • Jun 28 09:48
    dionfoster commented #77
  • Jun 28 09:39
    jamiepenney edited #2283
  • Jun 28 09:39
    jamiepenney edited #2283
  • Jun 28 09:38
    jamiepenney opened #2283
  • Jun 28 09:38
    jamiepenney opened #2283
  • Jun 28 02:04
    rochitsen commented #77
  • Jun 27 18:26
    CodingGorilla edited #2282
  • Jun 27 18:26
    CodingGorilla edited #2282
  • Jun 27 18:22
    CodingGorilla opened #2282
  • Jun 27 18:22
    CodingGorilla opened #2282
  • Jun 27 08:19
    VilleHakli edited #2281
  • Jun 27 08:19
    VilleHakli edited #2281
  • Jun 27 08:18
    VilleHakli opened #2281
  • Jun 27 08:18
    VilleHakli opened #2281
  • Jun 26 13:41

    mysticmind on 5.6.0

    (compare)

  • Jun 26 13:41

    mysticmind on 5.6.0

    (compare)

  • Jun 26 13:23
    mysticmind demilestoned #2258
  • Jun 26 13:23
    mysticmind milestoned #2258
Oskar Dudycz
@oskardudycz
They already did with IsTransactionComplete
So big thanks to @baronfel being on the watch
But 4.1.0 is already released so they won't downgrade the references
So we need to leave with that (although I hate this upgrade process)
After we decide what to do with 4.1.0, I’ll also check the 5.0 pre release. I have foreseen more troubles there - so it's better to start preparation and give us and them the chance to discuss the potential issues.
Babu Annamalai
@mysticmind
@jeremydmiller @oskardudycz @jokokko Looks like Npgsql 4.1.0 have broken semantic versioning... Can we restrict the version of Npgsql being used by Marten to 4.0.x? This way we can avoid users raising issues upgrading Npgsql to 4.1.
Thoughts?
Oskar Dudycz
@oskardudycz
Probably we should, as we did with <4.0 some time ago
Although the problem will still remain
Probably some users might want to use a newer version - eg. when they are using it together with the EF or Dapper
Babu Annamalai
@mysticmind
Yeah, but it atleast reduces the surface area the problems...
Oskar Dudycz
@oskardudycz
Yes, at least it will cut some weird bugs questions from the users as we had last time
I’ll prepare the PR for that
I’ll also check if we can drop using Npgsql.json.net package, that’s forcing the JSON.net upgrade
Babu Annamalai
@mysticmind
Sure
Oskar Dudycz
@oskardudycz
I think that if we move to support 462 or 461 then we could probably also go with the minor update
Although I really don't think comfortable with not following strictly semantic versioning...
It’s even more confusing for the users more than it is for us...
We could, in theory, go with 4.0 just to be prim and proper
but then it won’t be good from the marketing perspective
As we already officially started a discussion on the plans for the v4
Babu Annamalai
@mysticmind
Note that there is already an issue raised by a user who attempted upgrading to Npgsql 4.1.0. JasperFx/marten#1359
Oskar Dudycz
@oskardudycz
Yeah, but it’s from v3
I think that we need to do a better job of being more proactive in the version checking (eg. as @baronfel did for us). I was thinking about some nightly build with the latest prerelease of npgsql
Oskar Dudycz
@oskardudycz
I’ll probably also create issues with that for them, but imho we should try to be closer to them, as it’s our major reference package
Babu Annamalai
@mysticmind
I think the user has incorrectly put details as v3
However close we work with Npgsql versions, any breaking changes will take time to resolve for us
Nightly build with pre-release versions of Npgsql would certainly help us to uncover issues sooner than later
Oskar Dudycz
@oskardudycz
Yes I agree, but if we work closely with them then we can discuss with them turnaround as @baronfel together with me did
In general, I’m trying to find some pragmatic approach
😉
Babu Annamalai
@mysticmind
We depend fully on Npgsql so it imperative for us to figure out a pragmatic approach :-)
Oskar Dudycz
@oskardudycz
Exactly - yelling at clouds won't help 😋
(unfortunately 😉)
Jeremy D. Miller
@jeremydmiller
I say to limit it to 4.0 to <4.1 for right now
Oskar Dudycz
@oskardudycz
Ok, I checked, Npgsql.Json.NET can't be removed
JasperFx/marten#1360
here's the PR
Oskar Dudycz
@oskardudycz
I discussed with @roji on https://gitter.im/npgsql/npgsql the plan for the upgrade. They're willing to revert the JSON.NET upgrade
So the plan would be for this time being we'll:
  • lock the version to <4.1
  • review other potential issues and send the feedback to npgsql team
  • wait for the fixes in 4.1.1
  • make the update
Shay Rojansky
@roji
I'm also OK with reverting anything else that doesn't mean a major conflict/break/rewrite
Oskar Dudycz
@oskardudycz
:+1:
I wasn't aware that you're also on our channel :)
Shay Rojansky
@roji
Neither was I :) I think it's because I just got mentioned?
Oskar Dudycz
@oskardudycz
might be, but that's cool - you're more than welcome here :)
Shay Rojansky
@roji
npgsql/npgsql#2647
Jeremy D. Miller
@jeremydmiller
@roji Since you’re here, do y’all use any kind of automated tooling to check for SemVer violations in your API surface? The NServiceBus guys have something for that, but I’ve never used that. Or I’m guess that I’m asking, could you start doing that?
Shay Rojansky
@roji
Yeah, this release made me think about that more
In general things have been a bit too lax on that front
Jeremy D. Miller
@jeremydmiller
With Newtonsoft you might be able to get away with setting a pretty permissive version range. Newtonsoft is always a risk for diamond dependency issues