You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@tomee.apache.org by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com> on 2015/05/06 11:08:52 UTC
[discuss] tomee 2 groupId and dependency poms
Hi guys,
while voting on the version i'd like to propose to discuss 2 more topics:
1) do we keep org.apache.openejb as groupid or do we finally go to
org.apache.tomee?
2) do we create a dependency module (as assembly) with N children providing
pre-built pom for jaxrs embedded, tomee embedded jaxrs, plume
etc....Advantage would be to get rid of our internal dependencies as main
dependencies for users (I think to openejb-core for instance) + it would
make it easier to start for users when needing some advanced setup (tomee
embedded "plus" for instance).
wdyt?
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
<http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Tomitriber
<http://www.tomitribe.com>
Re: [discuss] tomee 2 groupId and dependency poms
Posted by Jean-Louis Monteiro <jl...@tomitribe.com>.
It was fast
--
Jean-Louis Monteiro
http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
http://www.tomitribe.com
On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 6:20 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> updated
>
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Tomitriber
> <http://www.tomitribe.com>
>
> 2015-05-14 12:56 GMT+02:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>:
>
> > Guys, i'd like to finish the gav changes by updating the groupid to
> > org.apache.tomee everywhere for tomee 7.
> >
> > If you have any objection please shout otherwise I'll do it on monday.
> >
> >
> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
> > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github
> > <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn
> > <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Tomitriber
> > <http://www.tomitribe.com>
> >
> > 2015-05-07 9:21 GMT+02:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>:
> >
> >>
> >> 2015-05-07 1:49 GMT+02:00 Jean-Louis Monteiro <jlmonteiro@tomitribe.com
> >:
> >>
> >>> >
> >>> > 1) do we keep org.apache.openejb as groupid or do we finally go to
> >>> > org.apache.tomee?
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>> org.apache.tomee
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> > 2) do we create a dependency module (as assembly) with N children
> >>> providing
> >>> > pre-built pom for jaxrs embedded, tomee embedded jaxrs, plume
> >>> > etc....Advantage would be to get rid of our internal dependencies as
> >>> main
> >>> > dependencies for users (I think to openejb-core for instance) + it
> >>> would
> >>> > make it easier to start for users when needing some advanced setup
> >>> (tomee
> >>> > embedded "plus" for instance).
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>> Overall idea is fine, but I had a pretty bad experience with bom and
> all
> >>> this crap previously. Usually it's worst than dealing with the real
> deps.
> >>> So +0 for me
> >>>
> >>>
> >> Well bom is the usage you do of it - I'm not a fan too. Here the idea is
> >> to propose some stability. Let say I do all the changes I spoke about
> then
> >> all your projects are broken and you need to redo your dependencies. If
> >> that's ok (actually it is just adding/removing 3-4 deps) we don't need
> it
> >> and that's fine.
> >>
> >>
> >>> --
> >>> Jean-Louis Monteiro
> >>> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> >>> http://www.tomitribe.com
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 11:08 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> >>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> > Hi guys,
> >>> >
> >>> > while voting on the version i'd like to propose to discuss 2 more
> >>> topics:
> >>> >
> >>> > 1) do we keep org.apache.openejb as groupid or do we finally go to
> >>> > org.apache.tomee?
> >>> > 2) do we create a dependency module (as assembly) with N children
> >>> providing
> >>> > pre-built pom for jaxrs embedded, tomee embedded jaxrs, plume
> >>> > etc....Advantage would be to get rid of our internal dependencies as
> >>> main
> >>> > dependencies for users (I think to openejb-core for instance) + it
> >>> would
> >>> > make it easier to start for users when needing some advanced setup
> >>> (tomee
> >>> > embedded "plus" for instance).
> >>> >
> >>> > wdyt?
> >>> >
> >>> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> >>> > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
> >>> > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
> >>> > https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> >>> > LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Tomitriber
> >>> > <http://www.tomitribe.com>
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
>
Re: [discuss] tomee 2 groupId and dependency poms
Posted by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>.
updated
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
<http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Tomitriber
<http://www.tomitribe.com>
2015-05-14 12:56 GMT+02:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>:
> Guys, i'd like to finish the gav changes by updating the groupid to
> org.apache.tomee everywhere for tomee 7.
>
> If you have any objection please shout otherwise I'll do it on monday.
>
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github
> <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn
> <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Tomitriber
> <http://www.tomitribe.com>
>
> 2015-05-07 9:21 GMT+02:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>:
>
>>
>> 2015-05-07 1:49 GMT+02:00 Jean-Louis Monteiro <jl...@tomitribe.com>:
>>
>>> >
>>> > 1) do we keep org.apache.openejb as groupid or do we finally go to
>>> > org.apache.tomee?
>>> >
>>>
>>> org.apache.tomee
>>>
>>>
>>> > 2) do we create a dependency module (as assembly) with N children
>>> providing
>>> > pre-built pom for jaxrs embedded, tomee embedded jaxrs, plume
>>> > etc....Advantage would be to get rid of our internal dependencies as
>>> main
>>> > dependencies for users (I think to openejb-core for instance) + it
>>> would
>>> > make it easier to start for users when needing some advanced setup
>>> (tomee
>>> > embedded "plus" for instance).
>>> >
>>>
>>> Overall idea is fine, but I had a pretty bad experience with bom and all
>>> this crap previously. Usually it's worst than dealing with the real deps.
>>> So +0 for me
>>>
>>>
>> Well bom is the usage you do of it - I'm not a fan too. Here the idea is
>> to propose some stability. Let say I do all the changes I spoke about then
>> all your projects are broken and you need to redo your dependencies. If
>> that's ok (actually it is just adding/removing 3-4 deps) we don't need it
>> and that's fine.
>>
>>
>>> --
>>> Jean-Louis Monteiro
>>> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
>>> http://www.tomitribe.com
>>>
>>> On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 11:08 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> > Hi guys,
>>> >
>>> > while voting on the version i'd like to propose to discuss 2 more
>>> topics:
>>> >
>>> > 1) do we keep org.apache.openejb as groupid or do we finally go to
>>> > org.apache.tomee?
>>> > 2) do we create a dependency module (as assembly) with N children
>>> providing
>>> > pre-built pom for jaxrs embedded, tomee embedded jaxrs, plume
>>> > etc....Advantage would be to get rid of our internal dependencies as
>>> main
>>> > dependencies for users (I think to openejb-core for instance) + it
>>> would
>>> > make it easier to start for users when needing some advanced setup
>>> (tomee
>>> > embedded "plus" for instance).
>>> >
>>> > wdyt?
>>> >
>>> > Romain Manni-Bucau
>>> > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
>>> > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
>>> > https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
>>> > LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Tomitriber
>>> > <http://www.tomitribe.com>
>>> >
>>>
>>
>>
>
Re: [discuss] tomee 2 groupId and dependency poms
Posted by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>.
Guys, i'd like to finish the gav changes by updating the groupid to
org.apache.tomee everywhere for tomee 7.
If you have any objection please shout otherwise I'll do it on monday.
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
<http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Tomitriber
<http://www.tomitribe.com>
2015-05-07 9:21 GMT+02:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>:
>
> 2015-05-07 1:49 GMT+02:00 Jean-Louis Monteiro <jl...@tomitribe.com>:
>
>> >
>> > 1) do we keep org.apache.openejb as groupid or do we finally go to
>> > org.apache.tomee?
>> >
>>
>> org.apache.tomee
>>
>>
>> > 2) do we create a dependency module (as assembly) with N children
>> providing
>> > pre-built pom for jaxrs embedded, tomee embedded jaxrs, plume
>> > etc....Advantage would be to get rid of our internal dependencies as
>> main
>> > dependencies for users (I think to openejb-core for instance) + it would
>> > make it easier to start for users when needing some advanced setup
>> (tomee
>> > embedded "plus" for instance).
>> >
>>
>> Overall idea is fine, but I had a pretty bad experience with bom and all
>> this crap previously. Usually it's worst than dealing with the real deps.
>> So +0 for me
>>
>>
> Well bom is the usage you do of it - I'm not a fan too. Here the idea is
> to propose some stability. Let say I do all the changes I spoke about then
> all your projects are broken and you need to redo your dependencies. If
> that's ok (actually it is just adding/removing 3-4 deps) we don't need it
> and that's fine.
>
>
>> --
>> Jean-Louis Monteiro
>> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
>> http://www.tomitribe.com
>>
>> On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 11:08 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi guys,
>> >
>> > while voting on the version i'd like to propose to discuss 2 more
>> topics:
>> >
>> > 1) do we keep org.apache.openejb as groupid or do we finally go to
>> > org.apache.tomee?
>> > 2) do we create a dependency module (as assembly) with N children
>> providing
>> > pre-built pom for jaxrs embedded, tomee embedded jaxrs, plume
>> > etc....Advantage would be to get rid of our internal dependencies as
>> main
>> > dependencies for users (I think to openejb-core for instance) + it would
>> > make it easier to start for users when needing some advanced setup
>> (tomee
>> > embedded "plus" for instance).
>> >
>> > wdyt?
>> >
>> > Romain Manni-Bucau
>> > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
>> > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
>> > https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
>> > LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Tomitriber
>> > <http://www.tomitribe.com>
>> >
>>
>
>
Re: [discuss] tomee 2 groupId and dependency poms
Posted by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>.
2015-05-07 1:49 GMT+02:00 Jean-Louis Monteiro <jl...@tomitribe.com>:
> >
> > 1) do we keep org.apache.openejb as groupid or do we finally go to
> > org.apache.tomee?
> >
>
> org.apache.tomee
>
>
> > 2) do we create a dependency module (as assembly) with N children
> providing
> > pre-built pom for jaxrs embedded, tomee embedded jaxrs, plume
> > etc....Advantage would be to get rid of our internal dependencies as main
> > dependencies for users (I think to openejb-core for instance) + it would
> > make it easier to start for users when needing some advanced setup (tomee
> > embedded "plus" for instance).
> >
>
> Overall idea is fine, but I had a pretty bad experience with bom and all
> this crap previously. Usually it's worst than dealing with the real deps.
> So +0 for me
>
>
Well bom is the usage you do of it - I'm not a fan too. Here the idea is to
propose some stability. Let say I do all the changes I spoke about then all
your projects are broken and you need to redo your dependencies. If that's
ok (actually it is just adding/removing 3-4 deps) we don't need it and
that's fine.
> --
> Jean-Louis Monteiro
> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> http://www.tomitribe.com
>
> On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 11:08 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau@gmail.com
> >
> wrote:
>
> > Hi guys,
> >
> > while voting on the version i'd like to propose to discuss 2 more topics:
> >
> > 1) do we keep org.apache.openejb as groupid or do we finally go to
> > org.apache.tomee?
> > 2) do we create a dependency module (as assembly) with N children
> providing
> > pre-built pom for jaxrs embedded, tomee embedded jaxrs, plume
> > etc....Advantage would be to get rid of our internal dependencies as main
> > dependencies for users (I think to openejb-core for instance) + it would
> > make it easier to start for users when needing some advanced setup (tomee
> > embedded "plus" for instance).
> >
> > wdyt?
> >
> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
> > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
> > https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> > LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Tomitriber
> > <http://www.tomitribe.com>
> >
>
Re: [discuss] tomee 2 groupId and dependency poms
Posted by Jean-Louis Monteiro <jl...@tomitribe.com>.
>
> 1) do we keep org.apache.openejb as groupid or do we finally go to
> org.apache.tomee?
>
org.apache.tomee
> 2) do we create a dependency module (as assembly) with N children providing
> pre-built pom for jaxrs embedded, tomee embedded jaxrs, plume
> etc....Advantage would be to get rid of our internal dependencies as main
> dependencies for users (I think to openejb-core for instance) + it would
> make it easier to start for users when needing some advanced setup (tomee
> embedded "plus" for instance).
>
Overall idea is fine, but I had a pretty bad experience with bom and all
this crap previously. Usually it's worst than dealing with the real deps.
So +0 for me
--
Jean-Louis Monteiro
http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
http://www.tomitribe.com
On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 11:08 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> while voting on the version i'd like to propose to discuss 2 more topics:
>
> 1) do we keep org.apache.openejb as groupid or do we finally go to
> org.apache.tomee?
> 2) do we create a dependency module (as assembly) with N children providing
> pre-built pom for jaxrs embedded, tomee embedded jaxrs, plume
> etc....Advantage would be to get rid of our internal dependencies as main
> dependencies for users (I think to openejb-core for instance) + it would
> make it easier to start for users when needing some advanced setup (tomee
> embedded "plus" for instance).
>
> wdyt?
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Tomitriber
> <http://www.tomitribe.com>
>
Re: [discuss] tomee 2 groupId and dependency poms
Posted by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>.
2015-05-06 14:50 GMT+02:00 Jonathan Gallimore <jg...@tomitribe.com>:
> On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 10:08 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau@gmail.com
> >
> wrote:
>
> > Hi guys,
> >
> > while voting on the version i'd like to propose to discuss 2 more topics:
> >
> > 1) do we keep org.apache.openejb as groupid or do we finally go to
> > org.apache.tomee?
> >
>
>
> I'm in favour of org.apache.tomee, especially if TomEE / OpenEJB versions
> are going to be aligned (see vote thread).
>
>
> > 2) do we create a dependency module (as assembly) with N children
> providing
> > pre-built pom for jaxrs embedded, tomee embedded jaxrs, plume
> > etc....Advantage would be to get rid of our internal dependencies as main
> > dependencies for users (I think to openejb-core for instance) + it would
> > make it easier to start for users when needing some advanced setup (tomee
> > embedded "plus" for instance).
> >
> >
> Sounds useful. I'd be keen for those to have the minimal dependencies
> required if at all possible. Presumably that wouldn't stop people using the
> underlying dependencies instead if they prefer that?
>
>
Sure but then if we break them that's their stuff. Today typically
openejb-core is the dependency for embedded EE (I simplify a bit but you
get the idea). When adding ee-concurrency-utilities it would have been
natural to keep it in another module but since openejb-core is the
dependency needing to bring it we had to add it in openejb-core to avoid t
add a spi for nothing. Also if one day we remove some part from
openejb-core like old specs we could keep them in a dependency pom to keep
it esy for users (ie 1 dep).
> Jon
>
> --
> Jonathan Gallimore
> http://twitter.com/jongallimore
> http://www.tomitribe.com
>
Re: [discuss] tomee 2 groupId and dependency poms
Posted by Jonathan Gallimore <jg...@tomitribe.com>.
On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 10:08 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> while voting on the version i'd like to propose to discuss 2 more topics:
>
> 1) do we keep org.apache.openejb as groupid or do we finally go to
> org.apache.tomee?
>
I'm in favour of org.apache.tomee, especially if TomEE / OpenEJB versions
are going to be aligned (see vote thread).
> 2) do we create a dependency module (as assembly) with N children providing
> pre-built pom for jaxrs embedded, tomee embedded jaxrs, plume
> etc....Advantage would be to get rid of our internal dependencies as main
> dependencies for users (I think to openejb-core for instance) + it would
> make it easier to start for users when needing some advanced setup (tomee
> embedded "plus" for instance).
>
>
Sounds useful. I'd be keen for those to have the minimal dependencies
required if at all possible. Presumably that wouldn't stop people using the
underlying dependencies instead if they prefer that?
Jon
--
Jonathan Gallimore
http://twitter.com/jongallimore
http://www.tomitribe.com