Hi boot team,
I'm opening this ticket for awareness that in the Couchbase Java SDK we released the 3.1.0 release which now also depends on the reactor 3.4.0 release (the 3.0.x series is on reactor 3.3 at the moment).
@mp911de asked me to open it so you are aware of that change. We are planning on bumping spring-data-couchbase 4.2.0 to 3.1.0 and leave 4.1.0 and 4.0.0 on SDK 3.0.
Please let me know if I can help on getting this in properly if there are questions.
Thanks!
Comment From: mp911de
Worth mentioning: Couchbase SDK relies on Project Reactor which puts them into a difficult situation regarding releases. The release window between Reactor and Data releases is rather short so we're currently in a situation where the current Couchbase driver (3.0.x) shipped with Boot 2.4 depends on Reactor 3.3. /cc @simonbasle
Comment From: daschl
In theory, it should be fine to run 3.4 reactor against the later 3.0.x SDKs, because we fixed all the deprecated API usage already (so our upgrade didn't require any code changes other than some tests), so I think it should be ok?
We did not want to bump minor reactor on our bugfix branches because of the 3.3 -> 3.4 changes and the risk of breaking downstream users of the SDK which still relied on only-deprecated functionality.
Comment From: simonbasle
In theory, it should be fine to run 3.4 reactor against the later 3.0.x SDKs, because we fixed all the deprecated API usage already (so our upgrade didn't require any code changes other than some tests), so I think it should be ok?
I think so too... Regarding releases, if you have any insight on how we could improve the situation, let me know.
Comment From: snicoll
Just to make sure I understood, this is about upgrading to Couchbase 3.1.0 and this upgrade will be included in Spring Data 2021.0 ultimately. This version is going to be shipped in Spring Boot 2.5 which will use the next version of reactor (3.5 I can only assume).
@daschl I don't understand what you're expecting from us at this point, sorry.
Comment From: daschl
@snicoll as I mentioned in the ticket description, @mp911de asked me to open it to make you all aware of the transitive dependency changes. If this information is of no use to you, I'm okay with that as well.
Comment From: snicoll
@daschl I had seen that from the get-go but I didn't understand what action was required from our side, hence why I am asking. Mark and I chatted a bit more and we came to the conclusion that we need to take a step back and discuss release schedule with the broader team. There isn't anything actionable short term here so I am going to close this issue. Thanks for letting us know.