You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@tomee.apache.org by David Blevins <da...@gmail.com> on 2017/08/10 01:58:45 UTC
[DISCUSS] Code donations: Sheldon and Chatterbox
Hi All,
I’d like to open the topic of potentially donating a couple components we’ve built over at tomitribe.io to our beloved TomEE project:
- https://tomitribe.io/projects/sheldon <https://tomitribe.io/projects/sheldon>
- https://tomitribe.io/projects/chatterbox <https://tomitribe.io/projects/chatterbox>
There are couple motivating factors:
- show the TomEE ecosystem is a bit bigger than just the server
- provide a clear pattern for “crazy new ideas” to start here that could potentially benefit TomEE or other EE related-projects
- more opportunities to earn commit
- give the community a boost
We went from EJB container to EE server. I’d be great to take another step and see us go to EE ecosystem.
Thoughts?
--
David Blevins
http://twitter.com/dblevins
http://www.tomitribe.com
Re: [DISCUSS] Code donations: Sheldon and Chatterbox
Posted by David Blevins <da...@gmail.com>.
> On Aug 10, 2017, at 10:38 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Interesting reasoning. What about tackling new specs - like mvc - which
> dont have yet a home at asf and would more inline with tomee and require
> more activity than "done" projects?
I’d be open to that.
Side note, there’s really still a ton of work to be done on Sheldon.
-David
Re: [DISCUSS] Code donations: Sheldon and Chatterbox
Posted by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>.
Interesting reasoning. What about tackling new specs - like mvc - which
dont have yet a home at asf and would more inline with tomee and require
more activity than "done" projects?
Le 10 août 2017 22:44, "David Blevins" <da...@gmail.com> a écrit :
> On Aug 10, 2017, at 1:12 AM, Jean-Louis Monteiro <jl...@tomitribe.com>
wrote:
>
> Does it mean we'll rename TomEE as a TLP to something else so TomEE can be
> a subproject and we will be creating more sub-projects for Sheldon or any
> other project?
I’d definitely want to keep TomEE as the TLP name. My primary goal is to
grow TomEE the brand and community and TLP with things that might directly
or indirectly help TomEE the server.
At Apache it’s very common for TLPs to have subprojects and not be
renamed. We can keep the TLP name as-is and foster crazy new ideas. If
any of them becomes a massive effort in its own right, we spin it out. APR
was originally an HTTPd subproject. Ant was originally a Tomcat subproject.
Most subprojects don’t become that big.
We’ve actually had a couple subprojects, like the EJB 2.x to 3x Conversion
Eclipse Plugin Jonathan wrote. Interestingly, it wasn’t actually working
on OpenEJB itself that got Jon commit, but this “crazy idea” subproject.
I’m not actually sure he had even one commit on OpenEJB trunk when we voted
him in.
Vishwa got voted in working on the build tools and twitter bot. Smaller
projects seem to be a lot easier for people to digest. In Jon’s case, the
subproject work encouraged him to dig into OpenEJB and the rest is history.
> I have seen a lot of discussions in different Apache projects regarding a
> common place for Java EE components (spec jars and common libraries). I
> know TomEE has been mentioned a couple of times, as well as other Apache
> projects.
> Is this a related discussion?
> Or should it be tackled at the same time?
I’d certainly welcome crazy new EE-related ideas and common libraries that
wanted to start here. So in that sense, very related.
We’d want them to be in some way beneficial to the TomEE server ecosystem,
directly or indirectly. They do not need to be TomEE-only components and
can definitely be reusable and have fun unique names.
In terms of at the same time, for me that’s a “no". There’ve been
discussions in Geronimo specifically on what to do with that project.
Those discussions have been going on for 2 years. We are not in a position
to tackle that here. I certainly wouldn’t want us to hold our breath,
because I don’t think anything there will resolve soon and don’t want to
see is in the position of not moving forward because we are waiting on
another community. I’d welcome the code and committers if they wanted to
come over.
We know we need to inject some blood into our community, so that’s the
primary goal. If it happens to kill two birds with one stone, cool. If
not, that’s also fine.
In terms of things we can do to make this community more vibrant, making it
easier for crazy new ideas to start here is a great step forward. I think
we need a couple crazy new ideas to seed that, hence the idea to donate
Sheldon and Chatterbox.
-David
Re: [DISCUSS] Code donations: Sheldon and Chatterbox
Posted by Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de.INVALID>.
Hi Matthew!
Many of us had a very similar experience. TomEE rocks!
The Geronimo App Server kind of belongs to the 'big iron' class. And as such it was really hard to run.
That's one of the reasons why the Geronimo App Server is dead. We are really on the fence of retiring the G server part.
The Geronimo project otoh maintains a lot of extremely useful components apart of the G server!
Most of this stuff is _also_ used by TomEE: the TransactionManager, javamail, xbean, etc
Even the TomEE specs jar is just a shade of a bunch of geronimo-spec jars merged together.
And a hell lot of other projects use those parts as well!
For example: the Geronimo TxManager is used by TomEE, OpenWebBeans, CXF, OpenJPA, etc.
As I said: I don't care whether those reusable modules are maintained over at the Geronimo project or here at TomEE.
But it must be really clear that those components are totally independent of any concrete server.
Otherwise we would have the same weird situation as we had with Geronimo back then when the server was well alive.
LieGrue,
strub
> Am 14.08.2017 um 09:21 schrieb chongma <ma...@nbmlaw.co.uk>:
>
> As an end user I moved to TomEE from Tomcat. I originally used Tomcat
> for Servlets and JSP and then started using JSF and some EE libraries
> until I discovered that TomEE was built with all the goodies already
> inside and pre configured. So from my point of view TomEE was a logical
> migration path as will be the case for a lot of Tomcat users.
>
> I tried Geronimo years ago thinking it was a kind of Tomcat Enterprise
> version but I believe the configuration was quite different to Tomcat
> and the documentation was not the same as what I got from Tomcat. I
> mean no offence but that was my impression and it was hard to convert to
> Geronimo having to learn everything again from scratch (virtual hosts,
> realms etc.)
>
> It may be that Geronimo is not that different from Tomcat but I am
> already using TomEE so it is unlikely I would switch at this point anyway.
>
>
> On 13/08/2017 23:26, Mark Struberg-2 [via TomEE & OpenEJB] wrote:
>> Let's sum this up.
>>
>> Would the TomEE project make sense as a body to host such 'ee commons'
>> modules? Yes, that is one possible option and might work out fine.
>>
>> Should those 'ee commons' modules get called TomEE-bla? NO, of course
>> not. Hack, didn't we learn anything from the past?
>> If some say we should not do that at Geronimo because people will
>> confuse the reusable parts (G-server independent) with the Geronimo
>> server itself. So what is different to doing the same at TomEE? If it
>> is still called TomEE then people will get confused the reusable
>> components with the TomEE server again.
>>
>> There must really be a clear distinction between the TomEE server and
>> those reusable components, otherwise we will have the same confusion
>> as there was with G. With the difference that the Geronimo Server is
>> about to get moved to the attic and thus there is now _only_ the
>> reusable parts left at Geronimo.
>> And the people who showed some activity are committer at Geronimo a
>> long time already.
>>
>> And no worries, the Geronimo server is dead and will not make a
>> comeback. TomEE is MUCH better and modern.
>> But otoh it doesn't make sense for TomEE to become a
>> flying-train-boat-bicycle.
>>
>> The TomEE mark is also NOT that important. What really IS important
>> are the people!
>>
>> LieGrue,
>> strub
>>
>>
>>> Am 13.08.2017 um 23:09 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <[hidden email]
>> </user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=4682452&i=0>>:
>>>
>>> Le 13 août 2017 21:25, "John D. Ament" <[hidden email]
>> </user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=4682452&i=1>> a écrit :
>>>
>>> In all honesty, while the ASF as a whole doesn't have a true
>> strategy, or
>>> expect projects to work to benefit each other, I do think in this
>> situation
>>> it makes a lot of sense to think about the various communities at
>> the ASF
>>> and do some thinking around what makes the most sense for a user of
>> Apache
>>> products (independent of past, present, future employers).
>>>
>>> There are some PMCs that exist to support the implementation of a
>> Java EE
>>> specification. There are other PMCs that support Java EE but also
>> come up
>>> with very easy ways to make their product work independent of Java
>> EE. By
>>> being independent of any specific application server, projects like
>>> Johnzon, OpenWebBeans can go ahead and be leveraged in other products.
>>> This gives those products broader reach by being fully independent. By
>>> putting Sheldon and Chatterbox directly into the TomEE PMC's hands,
>> you are
>>> closely tying the products together.
>>>
>>> One other idea that I heard throw around was creating an EE commons
>> type of
>>> project. It could handle these off to the side projects that are
>> really
>>> maintained by the ASF #usualSuspects and make it clear that they really
>>> work across many different platforms, similar to the original premise
>>> behind Apache DeltaSpike. On the flip side, I'm not convinced that
>>> Geronimo is that project either.
>>>
>>>
>>> Hmm, if not then G should have moved to attic. It is here exactly
>> for that
>>> purpose.
>>>
>>> Anyway back to the original topic: it sounds like faking tomee figures
>>> ...to fake them. Probably better to enter these projects by another
>> way for
>>> tomee and themselves like incubator, the EE umbrella project or other -
>>> keeping them on github can also makes sense estimating their future
>>> activity maybe, no?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> John
>>>
>>> On Sun, Aug 13, 2017 at 2:58 PM David Blevins <[hidden email]
>> </user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=4682452&i=2>>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> We can keep any existing ssh code if we like.
>>>>
>>>> In terms of why TomEE, as mentioned here’s are some of the benefits:
>>>>
>>>> - show the TomEE ecosystem is a bit bigger than just the server
>>>> - provide a clear pattern for “crazy new ideas” to start here that
>> could
>>>> potentially benefit TomEE or other EE related-projects
>>>> - more opportunities to earn commit
>>>> - give the community a boost
>>>>
>>>> We used to get a lot of committers in based on EJB improvements,
>> however
>>>> since that spec has slowed and is not moving forward, I think we
>> need more
>>>> opportunities for people to earn commit.
>>>>
>>>> In terms of G. Obviously as co-founder of the project and someone who
>>>> spent 9+ years on it full-time under 3 different employers, I have a
>>>> different relationship to the name. I think it’s great there’s new
>> blood
>>>> in G, including you, imagining a new future for it. But my heart is
>>> really
>>>> in TomEE. When I look at Geronimo I see my past, when I look at
>> TomEE I
>>>> see my future.
>>>>
>>>> Everyone is entitled to his or her own goals, hopes and dreams, I just
>>>> want to be clear where my heart is at.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> David Blevins
>>>> http://twitter.com/dblevins
>>>> http://www.tomitribe.com
>>>>
>>>>> On Aug 11, 2017, at 11:43 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <[hidden email]
>> </user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=4682452&i=3>>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Does it mean we drop the ssh module?
>>>>>
>>>>> Why ot going incubator to promote the portability of these projects?
>>>>> (Whatever you do, if tomee subproject it is perceived as tomee
>> bound).
>>>> Are
>>>>> they too small?
>>>>>
>>>>> Why not geronimo subprojects since it is the official umbrella
>> project
>>>> now
>>>>> - vs tomee is not until we rediscuss it transprojects.
>>>>>
>>>>> Really sounds weird to me to try to push it in tomee when we
>> agreed to
>>> do
>>>>> it in G weeks ago, what am I missing?
>>>>>
>>>>> Le 11 août 2017 22:58, "David Blevins" <[hidden email]
>> </user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=4682452&i=4>> a
>>>> écrit :
>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Aug 11, 2017, at 3:20 AM, Mark Struberg <[hidden email]
>> </user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=4682452&i=5>>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Reusable components make sense they are clearly distinctable.
>> The part
>>>>>> which contains that reusable components imo must get a different
>> brand
>>>> name
>>>>>> than TomEE.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sheldon would stay named Sheldon. Chatterbox would stay named
>>>>>> Chatterbox. They’d get their own JIRAs. They’d just be hosted
>> here on
>>>> you
>>>>>> could get to them via the tomee.apache.org website.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The problem here is: TomEE does a really bad job in pointing out
>> these
>>>>>> ties! If TomEE would kind of cumulate this progress and make it
>> clear
>>>> that
>>>>>> this makes it into TomEE, then it would be much clearer that
>> there is
>>> no
>>>>>> standstill but actually tons of activity.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think this is a great topic you should lead.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -David
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the
>> discussion below:
>> http://tomee-openejb.979440.n4.nabble.com/DISCUSS-Code-donations-Sheldon-and-Chatterbox-tp4682400p4682452.html
>>
>> To start a new topic under TomEE Dev, email
>> ml+s979440n982480h31@n4.nabble.com
>> To unsubscribe from TomEE Dev, click here
>> <http://tomee-openejb.979440.n4.nabble.com/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=unsubscribe_by_code&node=982480&code=bWF0dGhldy5icm9hZGhlYWRAbmJtbGF3LmNvLnVrfDk4MjQ4MHwtMjYxNzg5ODUz>.
>> NAML
>> <http://tomee-openejb.979440.n4.nabble.com/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=macro_viewer&id=instant_html%21nabble%3Aemail.naml&base=nabble.naml.namespaces.BasicNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NabbleNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NodeNamespace&breadcrumbs=notify_subscribers%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-instant_emails%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-send_instant_email%21nabble%3Aemail.naml>
>>
>
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://tomee-openejb.979440.n4.nabble.com/DISCUSS-Code-donations-Sheldon-and-Chatterbox-tp4682400p4682453.html
> Sent from the TomEE Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: [DISCUSS] Code donations: Sheldon and Chatterbox
Posted by chongma <ma...@nbmlaw.co.uk>.
As an end user I moved to TomEE from Tomcat. I originally used Tomcat
for Servlets and JSP and then started using JSF and some EE libraries
until I discovered that TomEE was built with all the goodies already
inside and pre configured. So from my point of view TomEE was a logical
migration path as will be the case for a lot of Tomcat users.
I tried Geronimo years ago thinking it was a kind of Tomcat Enterprise
version but I believe the configuration was quite different to Tomcat
and the documentation was not the same as what I got from Tomcat. I
mean no offence but that was my impression and it was hard to convert to
Geronimo having to learn everything again from scratch (virtual hosts,
realms etc.)
It may be that Geronimo is not that different from Tomcat but I am
already using TomEE so it is unlikely I would switch at this point anyway.
On 13/08/2017 23:26, Mark Struberg-2 [via TomEE & OpenEJB] wrote:
> Let's sum this up.
>
> Would the TomEE project make sense as a body to host such 'ee commons'
> modules? Yes, that is one possible option and might work out fine.
>
> Should those 'ee commons' modules get called TomEE-bla? NO, of course
> not. Hack, didn't we learn anything from the past?
> If some say we should not do that at Geronimo because people will
> confuse the reusable parts (G-server independent) with the Geronimo
> server itself. So what is different to doing the same at TomEE? If it
> is still called TomEE then people will get confused the reusable
> components with the TomEE server again.
>
> There must really be a clear distinction between the TomEE server and
> those reusable components, otherwise we will have the same confusion
> as there was with G. With the difference that the Geronimo Server is
> about to get moved to the attic and thus there is now _only_ the
> reusable parts left at Geronimo.
> And the people who showed some activity are committer at Geronimo a
> long time already.
>
> And no worries, the Geronimo server is dead and will not make a
> comeback. TomEE is MUCH better and modern.
> But otoh it doesn't make sense for TomEE to become a
> flying-train-boat-bicycle.
>
> The TomEE mark is also NOT that important. What really IS important
> are the people!
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
> > Am 13.08.2017 um 23:09 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <[hidden email]
> </user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=4682452&i=0>>:
> >
> > Le 13 août 2017 21:25, "John D. Ament" <[hidden email]
> </user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=4682452&i=1>> a écrit :
> >
> > In all honesty, while the ASF as a whole doesn't have a true
> strategy, or
> > expect projects to work to benefit each other, I do think in this
> situation
> > it makes a lot of sense to think about the various communities at
> the ASF
> > and do some thinking around what makes the most sense for a user of
> Apache
> > products (independent of past, present, future employers).
> >
> > There are some PMCs that exist to support the implementation of a
> Java EE
> > specification. There are other PMCs that support Java EE but also
> come up
> > with very easy ways to make their product work independent of Java
> EE. By
> > being independent of any specific application server, projects like
> > Johnzon, OpenWebBeans can go ahead and be leveraged in other products.
> > This gives those products broader reach by being fully independent. By
> > putting Sheldon and Chatterbox directly into the TomEE PMC's hands,
> you are
> > closely tying the products together.
> >
> > One other idea that I heard throw around was creating an EE commons
> type of
> > project. It could handle these off to the side projects that are
> really
> > maintained by the ASF #usualSuspects and make it clear that they really
> > work across many different platforms, similar to the original premise
> > behind Apache DeltaSpike. On the flip side, I'm not convinced that
> > Geronimo is that project either.
> >
> >
> > Hmm, if not then G should have moved to attic. It is here exactly
> for that
> > purpose.
> >
> > Anyway back to the original topic: it sounds like faking tomee figures
> > ...to fake them. Probably better to enter these projects by another
> way for
> > tomee and themselves like incubator, the EE umbrella project or other -
> > keeping them on github can also makes sense estimating their future
> > activity maybe, no?
> >
> >
> >
> > John
> >
> > On Sun, Aug 13, 2017 at 2:58 PM David Blevins <[hidden email]
> </user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=4682452&i=2>>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> We can keep any existing ssh code if we like.
> >>
> >> In terms of why TomEE, as mentioned here’s are some of the benefits:
> >>
> >> - show the TomEE ecosystem is a bit bigger than just the server
> >> - provide a clear pattern for “crazy new ideas” to start here that
> could
> >> potentially benefit TomEE or other EE related-projects
> >> - more opportunities to earn commit
> >> - give the community a boost
> >>
> >> We used to get a lot of committers in based on EJB improvements,
> however
> >> since that spec has slowed and is not moving forward, I think we
> need more
> >> opportunities for people to earn commit.
> >>
> >> In terms of G. Obviously as co-founder of the project and someone who
> >> spent 9+ years on it full-time under 3 different employers, I have a
> >> different relationship to the name. I think it’s great there’s new
> blood
> >> in G, including you, imagining a new future for it. But my heart is
> > really
> >> in TomEE. When I look at Geronimo I see my past, when I look at
> TomEE I
> >> see my future.
> >>
> >> Everyone is entitled to his or her own goals, hopes and dreams, I just
> >> want to be clear where my heart is at.
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> David Blevins
> >> http://twitter.com/dblevins
> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
> >>
> >>> On Aug 11, 2017, at 11:43 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <[hidden email]
> </user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=4682452&i=3>>
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Does it mean we drop the ssh module?
> >>>
> >>> Why ot going incubator to promote the portability of these projects?
> >>> (Whatever you do, if tomee subproject it is perceived as tomee
> bound).
> >> Are
> >>> they too small?
> >>>
> >>> Why not geronimo subprojects since it is the official umbrella
> project
> >> now
> >>> - vs tomee is not until we rediscuss it transprojects.
> >>>
> >>> Really sounds weird to me to try to push it in tomee when we
> agreed to
> > do
> >>> it in G weeks ago, what am I missing?
> >>>
> >>> Le 11 août 2017 22:58, "David Blevins" <[hidden email]
> </user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=4682452&i=4>> a
> >> écrit :
> >>>
> >>>>> On Aug 11, 2017, at 3:20 AM, Mark Struberg <[hidden email]
> </user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=4682452&i=5>>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Reusable components make sense they are clearly distinctable.
> The part
> >>>> which contains that reusable components imo must get a different
> brand
> >> name
> >>>> than TomEE.
> >>>>
> >>>> Sheldon would stay named Sheldon. Chatterbox would stay named
> >>>> Chatterbox. They’d get their own JIRAs. They’d just be hosted
> here on
> >> you
> >>>> could get to them via the tomee.apache.org website.
> >>>>
> >>>>> The problem here is: TomEE does a really bad job in pointing out
> these
> >>>> ties! If TomEE would kind of cumulate this progress and make it
> clear
> >> that
> >>>> this makes it into TomEE, then it would be much clearer that
> there is
> > no
> >>>> standstill but actually tons of activity.
> >>>>
> >>>> I think this is a great topic you should lead.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> -David
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> >>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the
> discussion below:
> http://tomee-openejb.979440.n4.nabble.com/DISCUSS-Code-donations-Sheldon-and-Chatterbox-tp4682400p4682452.html
>
> To start a new topic under TomEE Dev, email
> ml+s979440n982480h31@n4.nabble.com
> To unsubscribe from TomEE Dev, click here
> <http://tomee-openejb.979440.n4.nabble.com/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=unsubscribe_by_code&node=982480&code=bWF0dGhldy5icm9hZGhlYWRAbmJtbGF3LmNvLnVrfDk4MjQ4MHwtMjYxNzg5ODUz>.
> NAML
> <http://tomee-openejb.979440.n4.nabble.com/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=macro_viewer&id=instant_html%21nabble%3Aemail.naml&base=nabble.naml.namespaces.BasicNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NabbleNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NodeNamespace&breadcrumbs=notify_subscribers%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-instant_emails%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-send_instant_email%21nabble%3Aemail.naml>
>
--
View this message in context: http://tomee-openejb.979440.n4.nabble.com/DISCUSS-Code-donations-Sheldon-and-Chatterbox-tp4682400p4682453.html
Sent from the TomEE Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: [DISCUSS] Code donations: Sheldon and Chatterbox
Posted by Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de.INVALID>.
Let's sum this up.
Would the TomEE project make sense as a body to host such 'ee commons' modules? Yes, that is one possible option and might work out fine.
Should those 'ee commons' modules get called TomEE-bla? NO, of course not. Hack, didn't we learn anything from the past?
If some say we should not do that at Geronimo because people will confuse the reusable parts (G-server independent) with the Geronimo server itself. So what is different to doing the same at TomEE? If it is still called TomEE then people will get confused the reusable components with the TomEE server again.
There must really be a clear distinction between the TomEE server and those reusable components, otherwise we will have the same confusion as there was with G. With the difference that the Geronimo Server is about to get moved to the attic and thus there is now _only_ the reusable parts left at Geronimo.
And the people who showed some activity are committer at Geronimo a long time already.
And no worries, the Geronimo server is dead and will not make a comeback. TomEE is MUCH better and modern.
But otoh it doesn't make sense for TomEE to become a flying-train-boat-bicycle.
The TomEE mark is also NOT that important. What really IS important are the people!
LieGrue,
strub
> Am 13.08.2017 um 23:09 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>:
>
> Le 13 août 2017 21:25, "John D. Ament" <jo...@apache.org> a écrit :
>
> In all honesty, while the ASF as a whole doesn't have a true strategy, or
> expect projects to work to benefit each other, I do think in this situation
> it makes a lot of sense to think about the various communities at the ASF
> and do some thinking around what makes the most sense for a user of Apache
> products (independent of past, present, future employers).
>
> There are some PMCs that exist to support the implementation of a Java EE
> specification. There are other PMCs that support Java EE but also come up
> with very easy ways to make their product work independent of Java EE. By
> being independent of any specific application server, projects like
> Johnzon, OpenWebBeans can go ahead and be leveraged in other products.
> This gives those products broader reach by being fully independent. By
> putting Sheldon and Chatterbox directly into the TomEE PMC's hands, you are
> closely tying the products together.
>
> One other idea that I heard throw around was creating an EE commons type of
> project. It could handle these off to the side projects that are really
> maintained by the ASF #usualSuspects and make it clear that they really
> work across many different platforms, similar to the original premise
> behind Apache DeltaSpike. On the flip side, I'm not convinced that
> Geronimo is that project either.
>
>
> Hmm, if not then G should have moved to attic. It is here exactly for that
> purpose.
>
> Anyway back to the original topic: it sounds like faking tomee figures
> ...to fake them. Probably better to enter these projects by another way for
> tomee and themselves like incubator, the EE umbrella project or other -
> keeping them on github can also makes sense estimating their future
> activity maybe, no?
>
>
>
> John
>
> On Sun, Aug 13, 2017 at 2:58 PM David Blevins <da...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> We can keep any existing ssh code if we like.
>>
>> In terms of why TomEE, as mentioned here’s are some of the benefits:
>>
>> - show the TomEE ecosystem is a bit bigger than just the server
>> - provide a clear pattern for “crazy new ideas” to start here that could
>> potentially benefit TomEE or other EE related-projects
>> - more opportunities to earn commit
>> - give the community a boost
>>
>> We used to get a lot of committers in based on EJB improvements, however
>> since that spec has slowed and is not moving forward, I think we need more
>> opportunities for people to earn commit.
>>
>> In terms of G. Obviously as co-founder of the project and someone who
>> spent 9+ years on it full-time under 3 different employers, I have a
>> different relationship to the name. I think it’s great there’s new blood
>> in G, including you, imagining a new future for it. But my heart is
> really
>> in TomEE. When I look at Geronimo I see my past, when I look at TomEE I
>> see my future.
>>
>> Everyone is entitled to his or her own goals, hopes and dreams, I just
>> want to be clear where my heart is at.
>>
>>
>> --
>> David Blevins
>> http://twitter.com/dblevins
>> http://www.tomitribe.com
>>
>>> On Aug 11, 2017, at 11:43 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Does it mean we drop the ssh module?
>>>
>>> Why ot going incubator to promote the portability of these projects?
>>> (Whatever you do, if tomee subproject it is perceived as tomee bound).
>> Are
>>> they too small?
>>>
>>> Why not geronimo subprojects since it is the official umbrella project
>> now
>>> - vs tomee is not until we rediscuss it transprojects.
>>>
>>> Really sounds weird to me to try to push it in tomee when we agreed to
> do
>>> it in G weeks ago, what am I missing?
>>>
>>> Le 11 août 2017 22:58, "David Blevins" <da...@gmail.com> a
>> écrit :
>>>
>>>>> On Aug 11, 2017, at 3:20 AM, Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de.INVALID>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Reusable components make sense they are clearly distinctable. The part
>>>> which contains that reusable components imo must get a different brand
>> name
>>>> than TomEE.
>>>>
>>>> Sheldon would stay named Sheldon. Chatterbox would stay named
>>>> Chatterbox. They’d get their own JIRAs. They’d just be hosted here on
>> you
>>>> could get to them via the tomee.apache.org website.
>>>>
>>>>> The problem here is: TomEE does a really bad job in pointing out these
>>>> ties! If TomEE would kind of cumulate this progress and make it clear
>> that
>>>> this makes it into TomEE, then it would be much clearer that there is
> no
>>>> standstill but actually tons of activity.
>>>>
>>>> I think this is a great topic you should lead.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -David
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
Re: [DISCUSS] Code donations: Sheldon and Chatterbox
Posted by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>.
Le 13 août 2017 21:25, "John D. Ament" <jo...@apache.org> a écrit :
In all honesty, while the ASF as a whole doesn't have a true strategy, or
expect projects to work to benefit each other, I do think in this situation
it makes a lot of sense to think about the various communities at the ASF
and do some thinking around what makes the most sense for a user of Apache
products (independent of past, present, future employers).
There are some PMCs that exist to support the implementation of a Java EE
specification. There are other PMCs that support Java EE but also come up
with very easy ways to make their product work independent of Java EE. By
being independent of any specific application server, projects like
Johnzon, OpenWebBeans can go ahead and be leveraged in other products.
This gives those products broader reach by being fully independent. By
putting Sheldon and Chatterbox directly into the TomEE PMC's hands, you are
closely tying the products together.
One other idea that I heard throw around was creating an EE commons type of
project. It could handle these off to the side projects that are really
maintained by the ASF #usualSuspects and make it clear that they really
work across many different platforms, similar to the original premise
behind Apache DeltaSpike. On the flip side, I'm not convinced that
Geronimo is that project either.
Hmm, if not then G should have moved to attic. It is here exactly for that
purpose.
Anyway back to the original topic: it sounds like faking tomee figures
...to fake them. Probably better to enter these projects by another way for
tomee and themselves like incubator, the EE umbrella project or other -
keeping them on github can also makes sense estimating their future
activity maybe, no?
John
On Sun, Aug 13, 2017 at 2:58 PM David Blevins <da...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> We can keep any existing ssh code if we like.
>
> In terms of why TomEE, as mentioned here’s are some of the benefits:
>
> - show the TomEE ecosystem is a bit bigger than just the server
> - provide a clear pattern for “crazy new ideas” to start here that could
> potentially benefit TomEE or other EE related-projects
> - more opportunities to earn commit
> - give the community a boost
>
> We used to get a lot of committers in based on EJB improvements, however
> since that spec has slowed and is not moving forward, I think we need more
> opportunities for people to earn commit.
>
> In terms of G. Obviously as co-founder of the project and someone who
> spent 9+ years on it full-time under 3 different employers, I have a
> different relationship to the name. I think it’s great there’s new blood
> in G, including you, imagining a new future for it. But my heart is
really
> in TomEE. When I look at Geronimo I see my past, when I look at TomEE I
> see my future.
>
> Everyone is entitled to his or her own goals, hopes and dreams, I just
> want to be clear where my heart is at.
>
>
> --
> David Blevins
> http://twitter.com/dblevins
> http://www.tomitribe.com
>
> > On Aug 11, 2017, at 11:43 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Does it mean we drop the ssh module?
> >
> > Why ot going incubator to promote the portability of these projects?
> > (Whatever you do, if tomee subproject it is perceived as tomee bound).
> Are
> > they too small?
> >
> > Why not geronimo subprojects since it is the official umbrella project
> now
> > - vs tomee is not until we rediscuss it transprojects.
> >
> > Really sounds weird to me to try to push it in tomee when we agreed to
do
> > it in G weeks ago, what am I missing?
> >
> > Le 11 août 2017 22:58, "David Blevins" <da...@gmail.com> a
> écrit :
> >
> >>> On Aug 11, 2017, at 3:20 AM, Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de.INVALID>
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Reusable components make sense they are clearly distinctable. The part
> >> which contains that reusable components imo must get a different brand
> name
> >> than TomEE.
> >>
> >> Sheldon would stay named Sheldon. Chatterbox would stay named
> >> Chatterbox. They’d get their own JIRAs. They’d just be hosted here on
> you
> >> could get to them via the tomee.apache.org website.
> >>
> >>> The problem here is: TomEE does a really bad job in pointing out these
> >> ties! If TomEE would kind of cumulate this progress and make it clear
> that
> >> this makes it into TomEE, then it would be much clearer that there is
no
> >> standstill but actually tons of activity.
> >>
> >> I think this is a great topic you should lead.
> >>
> >>
> >> -David
> >>
> >>
>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Code donations: Sheldon and Chatterbox
Posted by "John D. Ament" <jo...@apache.org>.
In all honesty, while the ASF as a whole doesn't have a true strategy, or
expect projects to work to benefit each other, I do think in this situation
it makes a lot of sense to think about the various communities at the ASF
and do some thinking around what makes the most sense for a user of Apache
products (independent of past, present, future employers).
There are some PMCs that exist to support the implementation of a Java EE
specification. There are other PMCs that support Java EE but also come up
with very easy ways to make their product work independent of Java EE. By
being independent of any specific application server, projects like
Johnzon, OpenWebBeans can go ahead and be leveraged in other products.
This gives those products broader reach by being fully independent. By
putting Sheldon and Chatterbox directly into the TomEE PMC's hands, you are
closely tying the products together.
One other idea that I heard throw around was creating an EE commons type of
project. It could handle these off to the side projects that are really
maintained by the ASF #usualSuspects and make it clear that they really
work across many different platforms, similar to the original premise
behind Apache DeltaSpike. On the flip side, I'm not convinced that
Geronimo is that project either.
John
On Sun, Aug 13, 2017 at 2:58 PM David Blevins <da...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> We can keep any existing ssh code if we like.
>
> In terms of why TomEE, as mentioned here’s are some of the benefits:
>
> - show the TomEE ecosystem is a bit bigger than just the server
> - provide a clear pattern for “crazy new ideas” to start here that could
> potentially benefit TomEE or other EE related-projects
> - more opportunities to earn commit
> - give the community a boost
>
> We used to get a lot of committers in based on EJB improvements, however
> since that spec has slowed and is not moving forward, I think we need more
> opportunities for people to earn commit.
>
> In terms of G. Obviously as co-founder of the project and someone who
> spent 9+ years on it full-time under 3 different employers, I have a
> different relationship to the name. I think it’s great there’s new blood
> in G, including you, imagining a new future for it. But my heart is really
> in TomEE. When I look at Geronimo I see my past, when I look at TomEE I
> see my future.
>
> Everyone is entitled to his or her own goals, hopes and dreams, I just
> want to be clear where my heart is at.
>
>
> --
> David Blevins
> http://twitter.com/dblevins
> http://www.tomitribe.com
>
> > On Aug 11, 2017, at 11:43 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Does it mean we drop the ssh module?
> >
> > Why ot going incubator to promote the portability of these projects?
> > (Whatever you do, if tomee subproject it is perceived as tomee bound).
> Are
> > they too small?
> >
> > Why not geronimo subprojects since it is the official umbrella project
> now
> > - vs tomee is not until we rediscuss it transprojects.
> >
> > Really sounds weird to me to try to push it in tomee when we agreed to do
> > it in G weeks ago, what am I missing?
> >
> > Le 11 août 2017 22:58, "David Blevins" <da...@gmail.com> a
> écrit :
> >
> >>> On Aug 11, 2017, at 3:20 AM, Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de.INVALID>
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Reusable components make sense they are clearly distinctable. The part
> >> which contains that reusable components imo must get a different brand
> name
> >> than TomEE.
> >>
> >> Sheldon would stay named Sheldon. Chatterbox would stay named
> >> Chatterbox. They’d get their own JIRAs. They’d just be hosted here on
> you
> >> could get to them via the tomee.apache.org website.
> >>
> >>> The problem here is: TomEE does a really bad job in pointing out these
> >> ties! If TomEE would kind of cumulate this progress and make it clear
> that
> >> this makes it into TomEE, then it would be much clearer that there is no
> >> standstill but actually tons of activity.
> >>
> >> I think this is a great topic you should lead.
> >>
> >>
> >> -David
> >>
> >>
>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Code donations: Sheldon and Chatterbox
Posted by David Blevins <da...@gmail.com>.
We can keep any existing ssh code if we like.
In terms of why TomEE, as mentioned here’s are some of the benefits:
- show the TomEE ecosystem is a bit bigger than just the server
- provide a clear pattern for “crazy new ideas” to start here that could potentially benefit TomEE or other EE related-projects
- more opportunities to earn commit
- give the community a boost
We used to get a lot of committers in based on EJB improvements, however since that spec has slowed and is not moving forward, I think we need more opportunities for people to earn commit.
In terms of G. Obviously as co-founder of the project and someone who spent 9+ years on it full-time under 3 different employers, I have a different relationship to the name. I think it’s great there’s new blood in G, including you, imagining a new future for it. But my heart is really in TomEE. When I look at Geronimo I see my past, when I look at TomEE I see my future.
Everyone is entitled to his or her own goals, hopes and dreams, I just want to be clear where my heart is at.
--
David Blevins
http://twitter.com/dblevins
http://www.tomitribe.com
> On Aug 11, 2017, at 11:43 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Does it mean we drop the ssh module?
>
> Why ot going incubator to promote the portability of these projects?
> (Whatever you do, if tomee subproject it is perceived as tomee bound). Are
> they too small?
>
> Why not geronimo subprojects since it is the official umbrella project now
> - vs tomee is not until we rediscuss it transprojects.
>
> Really sounds weird to me to try to push it in tomee when we agreed to do
> it in G weeks ago, what am I missing?
>
> Le 11 août 2017 22:58, "David Blevins" <da...@gmail.com> a écrit :
>
>>> On Aug 11, 2017, at 3:20 AM, Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de.INVALID>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Reusable components make sense they are clearly distinctable. The part
>> which contains that reusable components imo must get a different brand name
>> than TomEE.
>>
>> Sheldon would stay named Sheldon. Chatterbox would stay named
>> Chatterbox. They’d get their own JIRAs. They’d just be hosted here on you
>> could get to them via the tomee.apache.org website.
>>
>>> The problem here is: TomEE does a really bad job in pointing out these
>> ties! If TomEE would kind of cumulate this progress and make it clear that
>> this makes it into TomEE, then it would be much clearer that there is no
>> standstill but actually tons of activity.
>>
>> I think this is a great topic you should lead.
>>
>>
>> -David
>>
>>
Re: [DISCUSS] Code donations: Sheldon and Chatterbox
Posted by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>.
Does it mean we drop the ssh module?
Why ot going incubator to promote the portability of these projects?
(Whatever you do, if tomee subproject it is perceived as tomee bound). Are
they too small?
Why not geronimo subprojects since it is the official umbrella project now
- vs tomee is not until we rediscuss it transprojects.
Really sounds weird to me to try to push it in tomee when we agreed to do
it in G weeks ago, what am I missing?
Le 11 août 2017 22:58, "David Blevins" <da...@gmail.com> a écrit :
> > On Aug 11, 2017, at 3:20 AM, Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de.INVALID>
> wrote:
> >
> > Reusable components make sense they are clearly distinctable. The part
> which contains that reusable components imo must get a different brand name
> than TomEE.
>
> Sheldon would stay named Sheldon. Chatterbox would stay named
> Chatterbox. They’d get their own JIRAs. They’d just be hosted here on you
> could get to them via the tomee.apache.org website.
>
> > The problem here is: TomEE does a really bad job in pointing out these
> ties! If TomEE would kind of cumulate this progress and make it clear that
> this makes it into TomEE, then it would be much clearer that there is no
> standstill but actually tons of activity.
>
> I think this is a great topic you should lead.
>
>
> -David
>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Code donations: Sheldon and Chatterbox
Posted by David Blevins <da...@gmail.com>.
> On Aug 11, 2017, at 3:20 AM, Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de.INVALID> wrote:
>
> Reusable components make sense they are clearly distinctable. The part which contains that reusable components imo must get a different brand name than TomEE.
Sheldon would stay named Sheldon. Chatterbox would stay named Chatterbox. They’d get their own JIRAs. They’d just be hosted here on you could get to them via the tomee.apache.org website.
> The problem here is: TomEE does a really bad job in pointing out these ties! If TomEE would kind of cumulate this progress and make it clear that this makes it into TomEE, then it would be much clearer that there is no standstill but actually tons of activity.
I think this is a great topic you should lead.
-David
Re: [DISCUSS] Code donations: Sheldon and Chatterbox
Posted by Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de.INVALID>.
A few thoughts as mentioned over at the Geronimo list:
Reusable components make sense they are clearly distinctable. The part which contains that reusable components imo must get a different brand name than TomEE. Otherwise you get the same problem as with Geronimo: people will think these parts ONLY work with TomEE and that they are not usable separately.
I don't care if those components are 'managed' by the TomEE PMC, the Geroiniom PMC or a new "ASF EE commons". All I want is to have a vibrant community. And we have that already. It's just not happening that much on the TomEE list.
The point is: if some outsiders say that TomEE is not really active then that's plain wrong. And of course it's our fault!
There is TONS of activity in Johnzon, OpenWebBeans, etc. And this is all done by people who are (most times) also TomEE committers. And it's also done in favour of TomEE.
The problem here is: TomEE does a really bad job in pointing out these ties! If TomEE would kind of cumulate this progress and make it clear that this makes it into TomEE, then it would be much clearer that there is no standstill but actually tons of activity.
LieGrue,
strub
> Am 10.08.2017 um 22:44 schrieb David Blevins <da...@gmail.com>:
>
>
>> On Aug 10, 2017, at 1:12 AM, Jean-Louis Monteiro <jl...@tomitribe.com> wrote:
>>
>> Does it mean we'll rename TomEE as a TLP to something else so TomEE can be
>> a subproject and we will be creating more sub-projects for Sheldon or any
>> other project?
>
> I’d definitely want to keep TomEE as the TLP name. My primary goal is to grow TomEE the brand and community and TLP with things that might directly or indirectly help TomEE the server.
>
> At Apache it’s very common for TLPs to have subprojects and not be renamed. We can keep the TLP name as-is and foster crazy new ideas. If any of them becomes a massive effort in its own right, we spin it out. APR was originally an HTTPd subproject. Ant was originally a Tomcat subproject.
>
> Most subprojects don’t become that big.
>
> We’ve actually had a couple subprojects, like the EJB 2.x to 3x Conversion Eclipse Plugin Jonathan wrote. Interestingly, it wasn’t actually working on OpenEJB itself that got Jon commit, but this “crazy idea” subproject. I’m not actually sure he had even one commit on OpenEJB trunk when we voted him in.
>
> Vishwa got voted in working on the build tools and twitter bot. Smaller projects seem to be a lot easier for people to digest. In Jon’s case, the subproject work encouraged him to dig into OpenEJB and the rest is history.
>
>> I have seen a lot of discussions in different Apache projects regarding a
>> common place for Java EE components (spec jars and common libraries). I
>> know TomEE has been mentioned a couple of times, as well as other Apache
>> projects.
>> Is this a related discussion?
>> Or should it be tackled at the same time?
>
> I’d certainly welcome crazy new EE-related ideas and common libraries that wanted to start here. So in that sense, very related.
>
> We’d want them to be in some way beneficial to the TomEE server ecosystem, directly or indirectly. They do not need to be TomEE-only components and can definitely be reusable and have fun unique names.
>
> In terms of at the same time, for me that’s a “no". There’ve been discussions in Geronimo specifically on what to do with that project. Those discussions have been going on for 2 years. We are not in a position to tackle that here. I certainly wouldn’t want us to hold our breath, because I don’t think anything there will resolve soon and don’t want to see is in the position of not moving forward because we are waiting on another community. I’d welcome the code and committers if they wanted to come over.
>
> We know we need to inject some blood into our community, so that’s the primary goal. If it happens to kill two birds with one stone, cool. If not, that’s also fine.
>
> In terms of things we can do to make this community more vibrant, making it easier for crazy new ideas to start here is a great step forward. I think we need a couple crazy new ideas to seed that, hence the idea to donate Sheldon and Chatterbox.
>
>
> -David
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Code donations: Sheldon and Chatterbox
Posted by David Blevins <da...@gmail.com>.
> On Aug 10, 2017, at 1:12 AM, Jean-Louis Monteiro <jl...@tomitribe.com> wrote:
>
> Does it mean we'll rename TomEE as a TLP to something else so TomEE can be
> a subproject and we will be creating more sub-projects for Sheldon or any
> other project?
I’d definitely want to keep TomEE as the TLP name. My primary goal is to grow TomEE the brand and community and TLP with things that might directly or indirectly help TomEE the server.
At Apache it’s very common for TLPs to have subprojects and not be renamed. We can keep the TLP name as-is and foster crazy new ideas. If any of them becomes a massive effort in its own right, we spin it out. APR was originally an HTTPd subproject. Ant was originally a Tomcat subproject.
Most subprojects don’t become that big.
We’ve actually had a couple subprojects, like the EJB 2.x to 3x Conversion Eclipse Plugin Jonathan wrote. Interestingly, it wasn’t actually working on OpenEJB itself that got Jon commit, but this “crazy idea” subproject. I’m not actually sure he had even one commit on OpenEJB trunk when we voted him in.
Vishwa got voted in working on the build tools and twitter bot. Smaller projects seem to be a lot easier for people to digest. In Jon’s case, the subproject work encouraged him to dig into OpenEJB and the rest is history.
> I have seen a lot of discussions in different Apache projects regarding a
> common place for Java EE components (spec jars and common libraries). I
> know TomEE has been mentioned a couple of times, as well as other Apache
> projects.
> Is this a related discussion?
> Or should it be tackled at the same time?
I’d certainly welcome crazy new EE-related ideas and common libraries that wanted to start here. So in that sense, very related.
We’d want them to be in some way beneficial to the TomEE server ecosystem, directly or indirectly. They do not need to be TomEE-only components and can definitely be reusable and have fun unique names.
In terms of at the same time, for me that’s a “no". There’ve been discussions in Geronimo specifically on what to do with that project. Those discussions have been going on for 2 years. We are not in a position to tackle that here. I certainly wouldn’t want us to hold our breath, because I don’t think anything there will resolve soon and don’t want to see is in the position of not moving forward because we are waiting on another community. I’d welcome the code and committers if they wanted to come over.
We know we need to inject some blood into our community, so that’s the primary goal. If it happens to kill two birds with one stone, cool. If not, that’s also fine.
In terms of things we can do to make this community more vibrant, making it easier for crazy new ideas to start here is a great step forward. I think we need a couple crazy new ideas to seed that, hence the idea to donate Sheldon and Chatterbox.
-David
Re: [DISCUSS] Code donations: Sheldon and Chatterbox
Posted by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>.
Same thought, for asf it sounds like a G subproject and not sure tomee fits
but not strongly against neither.
Side note: we had a ssh module already which never got attraction - not a
need i guess - so not sure it would get better welcoming this time.
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>
2017-08-10 10:12 GMT+02:00 Jean-Louis Monteiro <jl...@tomitribe.com>:
> Does it mean we'll rename TomEE as a TLP to something else so TomEE can be
> a subproject and we will be creating more sub-projects for Sheldon or any
> other project?
>
> I have seen a lot of discussions in different Apache projects regarding a
> common place for Java EE components (spec jars and common libraries). I
> know TomEE has been mentioned a couple of times, as well as other Apache
> projects.
> Is this a related discussion?
> Or should it be tackled at the same time?
>
>
> --
> Jean-Louis Monteiro
> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> http://www.tomitribe.com
>
> On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 5:00 AM, David Blevins <da...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > > On Aug 9, 2017, at 7:27 PM, John D. Ament <jo...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > <incubator hat>
> > > Don't forget to do IP clearance
> > > </incubator hat>
> >
> > Salute and Ack. Went through that process with a half-dozen code bases
> in
> > the 2003-2009 range. I was a pro then, not sure if my knowledge is
> dated.
> >
> > > I personally think these are awesome projects. David's been passionate
> > > about this stuff for a long time, and I was really hopefully to get
> these
> > > MDB enhancements working on the JMS spec, never happened :-(
> >
> > I pushed hard to have them not axe JMS from Java 8. Of course I’m
> > stubborn, so perhaps there is still another way.
> >
> > > It would be great to see these at Apache, and hopefully with a pretty
> > > robust test suite showing them working in multiple EE containers.
> >
> > Robust test suite would be awesome. I know Sheldon currently supports
> > Wildfly and TomEE. Jonathan Gallimore put quite a lot of work into it.
> > Testing wise, I think it was mostly manual. So some increased tests
> would
> > be good.
> >
> > Feature wise, there are a handful of things I’d love to see added to
> > Sheldon:
> >
> > - ability to use ssh keys instead of passwords
> > - ability to execute ‘ssh localhost -p 2222 <some command>’ style
> > commands that ssh allows
> > - ability to use @RolesAllowed on commands
> >
> > With those in there, you could do some extremely cool things. Not that
> > Sheldon isn’t darn cool already :)
> >
> >
> > -David
> >
> >
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Code donations: Sheldon and Chatterbox
Posted by Jean-Louis Monteiro <jl...@tomitribe.com>.
Does it mean we'll rename TomEE as a TLP to something else so TomEE can be
a subproject and we will be creating more sub-projects for Sheldon or any
other project?
I have seen a lot of discussions in different Apache projects regarding a
common place for Java EE components (spec jars and common libraries). I
know TomEE has been mentioned a couple of times, as well as other Apache
projects.
Is this a related discussion?
Or should it be tackled at the same time?
--
Jean-Louis Monteiro
http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
http://www.tomitribe.com
On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 5:00 AM, David Blevins <da...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> > On Aug 9, 2017, at 7:27 PM, John D. Ament <jo...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > <incubator hat>
> > Don't forget to do IP clearance
> > </incubator hat>
>
> Salute and Ack. Went through that process with a half-dozen code bases in
> the 2003-2009 range. I was a pro then, not sure if my knowledge is dated.
>
> > I personally think these are awesome projects. David's been passionate
> > about this stuff for a long time, and I was really hopefully to get these
> > MDB enhancements working on the JMS spec, never happened :-(
>
> I pushed hard to have them not axe JMS from Java 8. Of course I’m
> stubborn, so perhaps there is still another way.
>
> > It would be great to see these at Apache, and hopefully with a pretty
> > robust test suite showing them working in multiple EE containers.
>
> Robust test suite would be awesome. I know Sheldon currently supports
> Wildfly and TomEE. Jonathan Gallimore put quite a lot of work into it.
> Testing wise, I think it was mostly manual. So some increased tests would
> be good.
>
> Feature wise, there are a handful of things I’d love to see added to
> Sheldon:
>
> - ability to use ssh keys instead of passwords
> - ability to execute ‘ssh localhost -p 2222 <some command>’ style
> commands that ssh allows
> - ability to use @RolesAllowed on commands
>
> With those in there, you could do some extremely cool things. Not that
> Sheldon isn’t darn cool already :)
>
>
> -David
>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Code donations: Sheldon and Chatterbox
Posted by David Blevins <da...@gmail.com>.
> On Aug 9, 2017, at 7:27 PM, John D. Ament <jo...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> <incubator hat>
> Don't forget to do IP clearance
> </incubator hat>
Salute and Ack. Went through that process with a half-dozen code bases in the 2003-2009 range. I was a pro then, not sure if my knowledge is dated.
> I personally think these are awesome projects. David's been passionate
> about this stuff for a long time, and I was really hopefully to get these
> MDB enhancements working on the JMS spec, never happened :-(
I pushed hard to have them not axe JMS from Java 8. Of course I’m stubborn, so perhaps there is still another way.
> It would be great to see these at Apache, and hopefully with a pretty
> robust test suite showing them working in multiple EE containers.
Robust test suite would be awesome. I know Sheldon currently supports Wildfly and TomEE. Jonathan Gallimore put quite a lot of work into it. Testing wise, I think it was mostly manual. So some increased tests would be good.
Feature wise, there are a handful of things I’d love to see added to Sheldon:
- ability to use ssh keys instead of passwords
- ability to execute ‘ssh localhost -p 2222 <some command>’ style commands that ssh allows
- ability to use @RolesAllowed on commands
With those in there, you could do some extremely cool things. Not that Sheldon isn’t darn cool already :)
-David
Re: [DISCUSS] Code donations: Sheldon and Chatterbox
Posted by "John D. Ament" <jo...@apache.org>.
<incubator hat>
Don't forget to do IP clearance
</incubator hat>
I personally think these are awesome projects. David's been passionate
about this stuff for a long time, and I was really hopefully to get these
MDB enhancements working on the JMS spec, never happened :-(
It would be great to see these at Apache, and hopefully with a pretty
robust test suite showing them working in multiple EE containers.
John
On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 9:58 PM David Blevins <da...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I’d like to open the topic of potentially donating a couple components
> we’ve built over at tomitribe.io to our beloved TomEE project:
>
> - https://tomitribe.io/projects/sheldon <
> https://tomitribe.io/projects/sheldon>
> - https://tomitribe.io/projects/chatterbox <
> https://tomitribe.io/projects/chatterbox>
>
> There are couple motivating factors:
>
> - show the TomEE ecosystem is a bit bigger than just the server
> - provide a clear pattern for “crazy new ideas” to start here that could
> potentially benefit TomEE or other EE related-projects
> - more opportunities to earn commit
> - give the community a boost
>
> We went from EJB container to EE server. I’d be great to take another
> step and see us go to EE ecosystem.
>
> Thoughts?
>
>
> --
> David Blevins
> http://twitter.com/dblevins
> http://www.tomitribe.com
>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Code donations: Sheldon and Chatterbox
Posted by Jonathan Gallimore <jo...@gmail.com>.
I think this is a wonderful idea. Those two projects show some of the
possibilities of connectors, which is often a bit of an unknown. I think
having those projects as TomEE sub-projects would be great. They are
documented on tomitribe.io so we should think about how we'd want to bring
those over and structure the website for those sub-projects.
The thing that excites me most, though, is the pattern for "crazy new
ideas" as you put it. Having some space and a pattern to contribute those
new ideas sounds like a great way to get more people involved. I have
created some small helper modules that make it a little easier to use
different JMS providers - I have HornetQ and Artemis so far, and could
easily crank out a couple more having worked with JBossMQ, Tibco EMS and
Websphere MQ recently. I know that Daniel Cuhna created a CLI tool at one
point - I'm not sure where that is, but having a welcoming place for
initiatives like that means we can pull those folks into the TomEE
community.
+1 from me. Happy to help in any way I can.
Jon
On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 2:58 AM, David Blevins <da...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I’d like to open the topic of potentially donating a couple components
> we’ve built over at tomitribe.io to our beloved TomEE project:
>
> - https://tomitribe.io/projects/sheldon <https://tomitribe.io/
> projects/sheldon>
> - https://tomitribe.io/projects/chatterbox <https://tomitribe.io/
> projects/chatterbox>
>
> There are couple motivating factors:
>
> - show the TomEE ecosystem is a bit bigger than just the server
> - provide a clear pattern for “crazy new ideas” to start here that could
> potentially benefit TomEE or other EE related-projects
> - more opportunities to earn commit
> - give the community a boost
>
> We went from EJB container to EE server. I’d be great to take another
> step and see us go to EE ecosystem.
>
> Thoughts?
>
>
> --
> David Blevins
> http://twitter.com/dblevins
> http://www.tomitribe.com
>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Code donations: Sheldon and Chatterbox
Posted by Elder Moraes <el...@gmail.com>.
You guys really rock!!
Elder
Twitter: @elderjava <https://twitter.com/elderjava>
Blog: http://eldermoraes.com
2017-08-09 23:42 GMT-03:00 David Blevins <da...@gmail.com>:
> > On Aug 9, 2017, at 7:18 PM, Elder Moraes <el...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Don't know if I'm allowed to answer... and my apologies if I wasn't...
> :-)
>
> For 17 years this project has maintained a "users first, committers
> second” spirit. Committers are one part of and servants to the community.
> So the short answer is, absolutely, *everyone* who has their heart in the
> project is welcome and *encouraged* to chime in.
>
> You don’t grow a project by treating people who are not committers like
> they are not committers :) Treat people like they are committers and they
> soon will be.
>
> So a direct Thank You for having the bravery to speak up and I hope others
> follow your example :)
>
> Great to hear your support, Elder.
>
>
> -David
>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Code donations: Sheldon and Chatterbox
Posted by David Blevins <da...@gmail.com>.
> On Aug 9, 2017, at 7:18 PM, Elder Moraes <el...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Don't know if I'm allowed to answer... and my apologies if I wasn't... :-)
For 17 years this project has maintained a "users first, committers second” spirit. Committers are one part of and servants to the community. So the short answer is, absolutely, *everyone* who has their heart in the project is welcome and *encouraged* to chime in.
You don’t grow a project by treating people who are not committers like they are not committers :) Treat people like they are committers and they soon will be.
So a direct Thank You for having the bravery to speak up and I hope others follow your example :)
Great to hear your support, Elder.
-David
Re: [DISCUSS] Code donations: Sheldon and Chatterbox
Posted by Elder Moraes <el...@gmail.com>.
Don't know if I'm allowed to answer... and my apologies if I wasn't... :-)
But from the point of view of the community, I think it would be awesome.
TomEE has been my default EE server for a long time and it would be great
to see it even more powerful.
Didn't know these projects, but just had a look at them and love it!
Cheers,
Elder <https://twitter.com/elderjava>
Twitter: @elderjava <https://twitter.com/elderjava>
Blog: http://eldermoraes.com
2017-08-09 22:58 GMT-03:00 David Blevins <da...@gmail.com>:
> Hi All,
>
> I’d like to open the topic of potentially donating a couple components
> we’ve built over at tomitribe.io to our beloved TomEE project:
>
> - https://tomitribe.io/projects/sheldon <https://tomitribe.io/
> projects/sheldon>
> - https://tomitribe.io/projects/chatterbox <https://tomitribe.io/
> projects/chatterbox>
>
> There are couple motivating factors:
>
> - show the TomEE ecosystem is a bit bigger than just the server
> - provide a clear pattern for “crazy new ideas” to start here that could
> potentially benefit TomEE or other EE related-projects
> - more opportunities to earn commit
> - give the community a boost
>
> We went from EJB container to EE server. I’d be great to take another
> step and see us go to EE ecosystem.
>
> Thoughts?
>
>
> --
> David Blevins
> http://twitter.com/dblevins
> http://www.tomitribe.com
>
>