You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@openwebbeans.apache.org by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com> on 2017/05/02 15:39:52 UTC

[meecrowave] path to 1.0?

Think we can start to think about 1.0, I'd like to propose something for
1.0: move the components to have their own lifecycle. Concretely it would
move jolokia, jta, oauth2 integration in meecrowave-component/ subtree of
OWB svn and let them be released "on demand".

Goal is to not keep a super huge tree where we actually mainly change
maven/gradle plugins, testing stack and core between each release. However
I don't want to completely drop these components which make sense in
meecrowave ecosystem IMO. I see it as a hot/cold disk solution but for code
;).

Here is an illustration of the proposal:

http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openwebbeans/
  meecrowave/
    trunk
    branches
    tags
  meecrowave-components/
    trunk
        meecrowave-jta
        meecrowave-jolokia
        meecrowave-...
    branches
    tags

wdyt?

Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
<https://blog-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com> | Old Blog
<http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | JavaEE Factory
<https://javaeefactory-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com>

Re: [meecrowave] path to 1.0?

Posted by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>.
All the component i reviewed were portable - forgot to mention it so should
be., if not you are right.

2017-05-02 17:46 GMT+02:00 Thomas Andraschko <an...@gmail.com>:

> Does it really make sense the seperate the "components" in a extra
> "environment"?
> You know, we need a extra release cycle for the components and not sure if
> you can e.g. use a very old jta-component with the newest meecrowave core.
>
> 2017-05-02 17:39 GMT+02:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>:
>
> > Think we can start to think about 1.0, I'd like to propose something for
> > 1.0: move the components to have their own lifecycle. Concretely it would
> > move jolokia, jta, oauth2 integration in meecrowave-component/ subtree of
> > OWB svn and let them be released "on demand".
> >
> > Goal is to not keep a super huge tree where we actually mainly change
> > maven/gradle plugins, testing stack and core between each release.
> However
> > I don't want to completely drop these components which make sense in
> > meecrowave ecosystem IMO. I see it as a hot/cold disk solution but for
> code
> > ;).
> >
> > Here is an illustration of the proposal:
> >
> > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openwebbeans/
> >   meecrowave/
> >     trunk
> >     branches
> >     tags
> >   meecrowave-components/
> >     trunk
> >         meecrowave-jta
> >         meecrowave-jolokia
> >         meecrowave-...
> >     branches
> >     tags
> >
> > wdyt?
> >
> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> > <https://blog-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com> | Old Blog
> > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/
> > rmannibucau> |
> > LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | JavaEE Factory
> > <https://javaeefactory-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com>
> >
>

Re: [meecrowave] path to 1.0?

Posted by Thomas Andraschko <an...@gmail.com>.
Does it really make sense the seperate the "components" in a extra
"environment"?
You know, we need a extra release cycle for the components and not sure if
you can e.g. use a very old jta-component with the newest meecrowave core.

2017-05-02 17:39 GMT+02:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>:

> Think we can start to think about 1.0, I'd like to propose something for
> 1.0: move the components to have their own lifecycle. Concretely it would
> move jolokia, jta, oauth2 integration in meecrowave-component/ subtree of
> OWB svn and let them be released "on demand".
>
> Goal is to not keep a super huge tree where we actually mainly change
> maven/gradle plugins, testing stack and core between each release. However
> I don't want to completely drop these components which make sense in
> meecrowave ecosystem IMO. I see it as a hot/cold disk solution but for code
> ;).
>
> Here is an illustration of the proposal:
>
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openwebbeans/
>   meecrowave/
>     trunk
>     branches
>     tags
>   meecrowave-components/
>     trunk
>         meecrowave-jta
>         meecrowave-jolokia
>         meecrowave-...
>     branches
>     tags
>
> wdyt?
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> <https://blog-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com> | Old Blog
> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/
> rmannibucau> |
> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | JavaEE Factory
> <https://javaeefactory-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com>
>