You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@tomee.apache.org by Jean-Louis Monteiro <jl...@tomitribe.com> on 2021/10/01 11:25:25 UTC
TomEE Jakarta project - have we reach the limit?
Hi all,
I was looking at a way to do a final release of TomEE 9 but we have some
significant work before we can do that.
- arquillian integration
- standalone and lite distributions
- Maven plugins
- boms
I was about to add that into tomee-jakarta by having the same approach so
we don't have the cost of maintaining both TomEE 8 and TomEE source tree.
But looks like to do that we end up by duplicating pretty much the entire
TomEE tree but the examples.
Is it worth it?
Should we move master to Jakarta and leave a maintenance branch for TomEE 8?
--
Jean-Louis Monteiro
http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
http://www.tomitribe.com
Re: TomEE Jakarta project - have we reach the limit?
Posted by Jean-Louis Monteiro <jl...@tomitribe.com>.
On Fri, Oct 1, 2021 at 1:40 PM Thomas Andraschko <
andraschko.thomas@gmail.com> wrote:
> TBH we have to migrate to jakarta anyway. Targeting EE9 or EE10.
>
That's my point. We'll have to do it someday.
>
> IMO the most people dont care about EE9, so i would branch/tag EE9 on the
> road to EE10 but never maintain or release it.
>
That's another option yes.
>
> Also not sure about the exact timeline, when we should start to migrate.
>
>
>
>
>
> Am Fr., 1. Okt. 2021 um 13:25 Uhr schrieb Jean-Louis Monteiro <
> jlmonteiro@tomitribe.com>:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I was looking at a way to do a final release of TomEE 9 but we have some
> > significant work before we can do that.
> > - arquillian integration
> > - standalone and lite distributions
> > - Maven plugins
> > - boms
> >
> > I was about to add that into tomee-jakarta by having the same approach so
> > we don't have the cost of maintaining both TomEE 8 and TomEE source tree.
> >
> > But looks like to do that we end up by duplicating pretty much the entire
> > TomEE tree but the examples.
> >
> > Is it worth it?
> > Should we move master to Jakarta and leave a maintenance branch for TomEE
> > 8?
> > --
> > Jean-Louis Monteiro
> > http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> > http://www.tomitribe.com
> >
>
Re: TomEE Jakarta project - have we reach the limit?
Posted by Jean-Louis Monteiro <jl...@tomitribe.com>.
It's a bit of a chicken and the egg issue.
We could target EE 9 as well. The point is we have to duplicate a lot of
modules from master to tomee-jakarta project and configure the transformer
to do package relocation.
Works but quite heavy if we want to cover everything.
If we decide to move master to a TomEE maintenance branch and switch master
to jakarta, we can do the relocation in the source itself.
Of course the downside is maintenance cost as we'll have to backport to
TomEE branch with the packages always conflicting.
--
Jean-Louis Monteiro
http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
http://www.tomitribe.com
On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 11:44 AM Zowalla, Richard <
richard.zowalla@hs-heilbronn.de> wrote:
> I agree with Thomas.
>
> We are not migrating to EE9 (with TomEE) as we are missing the plugins,
> unit-test containers, arquillian integration, etc. - I guess, the next
> one will be EE10 to aim for.
>
> Gruss
> Richard
>
> Am Freitag, dem 01.10.2021 um 13:40 +0200 schrieb Thomas Andraschko:
> > TBH we have to migrate to jakarta anyway. Targeting EE9 or EE10.
> >
> > IMO the most people dont care about EE9, so i would branch/tag EE9 on
> > the
> > road to EE10 but never maintain or release it.
> >
> > Also not sure about the exact timeline, when we should start to
> > migrate.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Am Fr., 1. Okt. 2021 um 13:25 Uhr schrieb Jean-Louis Monteiro <
> > jlmonteiro@tomitribe.com>:
> >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > I was looking at a way to do a final release of TomEE 9 but we have
> > > some
> > > significant work before we can do that.
> > > - arquillian integration
> > > - standalone and lite distributions
> > > - Maven plugins
> > > - boms
> > >
> > > I was about to add that into tomee-jakarta by having the same
> > > approach so
> > > we don't have the cost of maintaining both TomEE 8 and TomEE source
> > > tree.
> > >
> > > But looks like to do that we end up by duplicating pretty much the
> > > entire
> > > TomEE tree but the examples.
> > >
> > > Is it worth it?
> > > Should we move master to Jakarta and leave a maintenance branch for
> > > TomEE
> > > 8?
> > > --
> > > Jean-Louis Monteiro
> > > http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> > > http://www.tomitribe.com
> > >
>
Re: TomEE Jakarta project - have we reach the limit?
Posted by "Zowalla, Richard" <ri...@hs-heilbronn.de>.
I agree with Thomas.
We are not migrating to EE9 (with TomEE) as we are missing the plugins,
unit-test containers, arquillian integration, etc. - I guess, the next
one will be EE10 to aim for.
Gruss
Richard
Am Freitag, dem 01.10.2021 um 13:40 +0200 schrieb Thomas Andraschko:
> TBH we have to migrate to jakarta anyway. Targeting EE9 or EE10.
>
> IMO the most people dont care about EE9, so i would branch/tag EE9 on
> the
> road to EE10 but never maintain or release it.
>
> Also not sure about the exact timeline, when we should start to
> migrate.
>
>
>
>
>
> Am Fr., 1. Okt. 2021 um 13:25 Uhr schrieb Jean-Louis Monteiro <
> jlmonteiro@tomitribe.com>:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I was looking at a way to do a final release of TomEE 9 but we have
> > some
> > significant work before we can do that.
> > - arquillian integration
> > - standalone and lite distributions
> > - Maven plugins
> > - boms
> >
> > I was about to add that into tomee-jakarta by having the same
> > approach so
> > we don't have the cost of maintaining both TomEE 8 and TomEE source
> > tree.
> >
> > But looks like to do that we end up by duplicating pretty much the
> > entire
> > TomEE tree but the examples.
> >
> > Is it worth it?
> > Should we move master to Jakarta and leave a maintenance branch for
> > TomEE
> > 8?
> > --
> > Jean-Louis Monteiro
> > http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> > http://www.tomitribe.com
> >
Re: TomEE Jakarta project - have we reach the limit?
Posted by Thomas Andraschko <an...@gmail.com>.
TBH we have to migrate to jakarta anyway. Targeting EE9 or EE10.
IMO the most people dont care about EE9, so i would branch/tag EE9 on the
road to EE10 but never maintain or release it.
Also not sure about the exact timeline, when we should start to migrate.
Am Fr., 1. Okt. 2021 um 13:25 Uhr schrieb Jean-Louis Monteiro <
jlmonteiro@tomitribe.com>:
> Hi all,
>
> I was looking at a way to do a final release of TomEE 9 but we have some
> significant work before we can do that.
> - arquillian integration
> - standalone and lite distributions
> - Maven plugins
> - boms
>
> I was about to add that into tomee-jakarta by having the same approach so
> we don't have the cost of maintaining both TomEE 8 and TomEE source tree.
>
> But looks like to do that we end up by duplicating pretty much the entire
> TomEE tree but the examples.
>
> Is it worth it?
> Should we move master to Jakarta and leave a maintenance branch for TomEE
> 8?
> --
> Jean-Louis Monteiro
> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> http://www.tomitribe.com
>
Re: TomEE Jakarta project - have we reach the limit?
Posted by Cesar Hernandez <ce...@gmail.com>.
>
> IMO the following is the best way:
> - branch 8.0.x
> - make master 9.0 and rename javax -> jakarta
> - branch 9.0 after everything is working fine
> - working on 10.0 in master
> - maintain 8.0 and 10.0 and dont maintain the 9.0 branch
+1
In terms of how we handle 9.x, I think we'd want to stay on top of any
> CVEs in that release for at least 6 months after 10 goes final so people
> have at least a little time to transition
+1
By merging both opinions above, the following would be a potential set of
steps:
- branch 8.0.x
- make master 9.0 and rename javax -> jakarta
- maintain 8.0 and 9.0 (master)
- When 10 is out, keep 10 in master and branch 9.0.
- Maintain 8, 9, and master (10)
El mar, 5 oct 2021 a las 15:31, David Blevins (<da...@gmail.com>)
escribió:
> > On Oct 5, 2021, at 1:59 AM, Thomas Andraschko <
> andraschko.thomas@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > yep
> > i think we have to maintain 8.0.x anyway as its the last javax release
> and
> > we cant expect that everyone does a fast migration
> >
> > IMO the following is the best way:
> > - branch 8.0.x
> > - make master 9.0 and rename javax -> jakarta
> > - branch 9.0 after everything is working fine
> > - working on 10.0 in master
> > - maintain 8.0 and 10.0 and dont maintain the 9.0 branch
>
> Agree with making 8 be the branch and 9 be main/master. In terms of how
> we handle 9.x, I think we'd want to stay on top of any CVEs in that release
> for at least 6 months after 10 goes final so people have at least a little
> time to transition over.
>
>
> -David
>
>
> >
> >
> > Am Di., 5. Okt. 2021 um 10:53 Uhr schrieb Jean-Louis Monteiro <
> > jlmonteiro@tomitribe.com>:
> >
> >> Agreed ...
> >>
> >> 1.7.x - EOL
> >> 7.0.x and 7.1.x - mostly similar so if we maintain one, we should
> maintain
> >> the other.
> >>
> >> But I agree that 1 actively developed version (TomEE master/TomEE 9.x)
> and
> >> 1 maintained version (TomEE 8.x) is good.
> >> That'd be my choice.
> >> --
> >> Jean-Louis Monteiro
> >> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, Oct 5, 2021 at 10:37 AM Zowalla, Richard <
> >> richard.zowalla@hs-heilbronn.de> wrote:
> >>
> >>> +1
> >>>
> >>> I am wondering, if we still maintain 7.0.x, 7.1.x in the future (1.7.x
> >>> is eol, I guess) ? Maintenance cost will rise with every additional
> >>> version branch. The last releases of 7.0.x and 7.1.x are 1 year old...
> >>> but this is maybe another discussion.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Am Dienstag, dem 05.10.2021 um 10:05 +0200 schrieb Jean-Louis Monteiro:
> >>>> Thanks everyone.
> >>>>
> >>>> Same feeling here.
> >>>> I think we tried and pushed it as much as we could.
> >>>>
> >>>> What we can do is make sure we fix remaining failures on TCK and
> >>>> support
> >>>> JDK 17 with TomEE.
> >>>> Do a release, branch for maintenance and move master to jakarta.
> >>>>
> >>>> Does it sound like an acceptable plan?
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Jean-Louis Monteiro
> >>>> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> >>>> http://www.tomitribe.com
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Tue, Oct 5, 2021 at 7:56 AM David Jencks <david.a.jencks@gmail.com
> >>>>>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Maybe even “Our second release _confirmed_…”…
> >>>>>
> >>>>> David Jencks
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On Oct 4, 2021, at 12:33 PM, David Blevins <
> >>>>>> david.blevins@gmail.com>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>> - Our first release proved releasing both 8 & 9 together can be
> >>>>> impractical. The TomEE 8 binaries were a dud, only TomEE 9 was
> >>>>> released.
> >>>>> There was communication overhead and made for a potentially
> >>>>> confusing
> >>>>> release. The TomEE 9 binaries are still very limited.
> >>>>>>> - Our first release proved releasing both 8 & 9 together can be
> >>>>> impractical. The TomEE 8 binaries were released, we didn't release
> >>>>> TomEE
> >>>>> 9. It's the second time we've done that. We've only managed one
> >>>>> TomEE 9
> >>>>> release in the last 10 months.
> >>>>>> This was supposed to start "our second
> >>>>>> release". CopyPasteException :)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> -David
> >>>>>>
> >>> --
> >>> Richard Zowalla, M.Sc.
> >>> Research Associate, PhD Student | Medical Informatics
> >>>
> >>> Hochschule Heilbronn – University of Applied Sciences
> >>> Max-Planck-Str. 39
> >>> D-74081 Heilbronn
> >>> phone: +49 7131 504 6791 (zur Zeit nicht via Telefon erreichbar)
> >>> mail: richard.zowalla@hs-heilbronn.de
> >>> web: https://www.mi.hs-heilbronn.de/
> >>>
> >>
>
>
--
Atentamente:
César Hernández.
Re: TomEE Jakarta project - have we reach the limit?
Posted by David Blevins <da...@gmail.com>.
> On Oct 5, 2021, at 1:59 AM, Thomas Andraschko <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> yep
> i think we have to maintain 8.0.x anyway as its the last javax release and
> we cant expect that everyone does a fast migration
>
> IMO the following is the best way:
> - branch 8.0.x
> - make master 9.0 and rename javax -> jakarta
> - branch 9.0 after everything is working fine
> - working on 10.0 in master
> - maintain 8.0 and 10.0 and dont maintain the 9.0 branch
Agree with making 8 be the branch and 9 be main/master. In terms of how we handle 9.x, I think we'd want to stay on top of any CVEs in that release for at least 6 months after 10 goes final so people have at least a little time to transition over.
-David
>
>
> Am Di., 5. Okt. 2021 um 10:53 Uhr schrieb Jean-Louis Monteiro <
> jlmonteiro@tomitribe.com>:
>
>> Agreed ...
>>
>> 1.7.x - EOL
>> 7.0.x and 7.1.x - mostly similar so if we maintain one, we should maintain
>> the other.
>>
>> But I agree that 1 actively developed version (TomEE master/TomEE 9.x) and
>> 1 maintained version (TomEE 8.x) is good.
>> That'd be my choice.
>> --
>> Jean-Louis Monteiro
>> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
>> http://www.tomitribe.com
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 5, 2021 at 10:37 AM Zowalla, Richard <
>> richard.zowalla@hs-heilbronn.de> wrote:
>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> I am wondering, if we still maintain 7.0.x, 7.1.x in the future (1.7.x
>>> is eol, I guess) ? Maintenance cost will rise with every additional
>>> version branch. The last releases of 7.0.x and 7.1.x are 1 year old...
>>> but this is maybe another discussion.
>>>
>>>
>>> Am Dienstag, dem 05.10.2021 um 10:05 +0200 schrieb Jean-Louis Monteiro:
>>>> Thanks everyone.
>>>>
>>>> Same feeling here.
>>>> I think we tried and pushed it as much as we could.
>>>>
>>>> What we can do is make sure we fix remaining failures on TCK and
>>>> support
>>>> JDK 17 with TomEE.
>>>> Do a release, branch for maintenance and move master to jakarta.
>>>>
>>>> Does it sound like an acceptable plan?
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Jean-Louis Monteiro
>>>> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
>>>> http://www.tomitribe.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Oct 5, 2021 at 7:56 AM David Jencks <david.a.jencks@gmail.com
>>>>>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Maybe even “Our second release _confirmed_…”…
>>>>>
>>>>> David Jencks
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Oct 4, 2021, at 12:33 PM, David Blevins <
>>>>>> david.blevins@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> - Our first release proved releasing both 8 & 9 together can be
>>>>> impractical. The TomEE 8 binaries were a dud, only TomEE 9 was
>>>>> released.
>>>>> There was communication overhead and made for a potentially
>>>>> confusing
>>>>> release. The TomEE 9 binaries are still very limited.
>>>>>>> - Our first release proved releasing both 8 & 9 together can be
>>>>> impractical. The TomEE 8 binaries were released, we didn't release
>>>>> TomEE
>>>>> 9. It's the second time we've done that. We've only managed one
>>>>> TomEE 9
>>>>> release in the last 10 months.
>>>>>> This was supposed to start "our second
>>>>>> release". CopyPasteException :)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -David
>>>>>>
>>> --
>>> Richard Zowalla, M.Sc.
>>> Research Associate, PhD Student | Medical Informatics
>>>
>>> Hochschule Heilbronn – University of Applied Sciences
>>> Max-Planck-Str. 39
>>> D-74081 Heilbronn
>>> phone: +49 7131 504 6791 (zur Zeit nicht via Telefon erreichbar)
>>> mail: richard.zowalla@hs-heilbronn.de
>>> web: https://www.mi.hs-heilbronn.de/
>>>
>>
Re: TomEE Jakarta project - have we reach the limit?
Posted by "Wiesner, Martin" <ma...@hs-heilbronn.de>.
Hi all,
the proposed plan by Thomas sounds reasonable. +1
IMHO, 8.0.x line should definitely be continued for those not able to migrate yet, as brought up by Jean-Louis.
Given the planned 8.0.9 version will compatible and work with Java 17 (LTS), that 8.0.x line should be curated for some time.
That’s my 2c.
Best
Martin
—
http://twitter.com/mawiesne
Am 05.10.2021 um 12:17 schrieb Jean-Louis Monteiro <jl...@tomitribe.com>>:
Thanks for the additional thoughts Thomas.
I'll wait for some more thoughts and I might create a poll and let everyone
to vote on what they like.
--
Jean-Louis Monteiro
http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
http://www.tomitribe.com
On Tue, Oct 5, 2021 at 10:59 AM Thomas Andraschko <
andraschko.thomas@gmail.com> wrote:
yep
i think we have to maintain 8.0.x anyway as its the last javax release and
we cant expect that everyone does a fast migration
IMO the following is the best way:
- branch 8.0.x
- make master 9.0 and rename javax -> jakarta
- branch 9.0 after everything is working fine
- working on 10.0 in master
- maintain 8.0 and 10.0 and dont maintain the 9.0 branch
Am Di., 5. Okt. 2021 um 10:53 Uhr schrieb Jean-Louis Monteiro <
jlmonteiro@tomitribe.com>:
Agreed ...
1.7.x - EOL
7.0.x and 7.1.x - mostly similar so if we maintain one, we should
maintain
the other.
But I agree that 1 actively developed version (TomEE master/TomEE 9.x)
and
1 maintained version (TomEE 8.x) is good.
That'd be my choice.
--
Jean-Louis Monteiro
http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
http://www.tomitribe.com
On Tue, Oct 5, 2021 at 10:37 AM Zowalla, Richard <
richard.zowalla@hs-heilbronn.de> wrote:
+1
I am wondering, if we still maintain 7.0.x, 7.1.x in the future (1.7.x
is eol, I guess) ? Maintenance cost will rise with every additional
version branch. The last releases of 7.0.x and 7.1.x are 1 year old...
but this is maybe another discussion.
Am Dienstag, dem 05.10.2021 um 10:05 +0200 schrieb Jean-Louis Monteiro:
Thanks everyone.
Same feeling here.
I think we tried and pushed it as much as we could.
What we can do is make sure we fix remaining failures on TCK and
support
JDK 17 with TomEE.
Do a release, branch for maintenance and move master to jakarta.
Does it sound like an acceptable plan?
--
Jean-Louis Monteiro
http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
http://www.tomitribe.com
On Tue, Oct 5, 2021 at 7:56 AM David Jencks <
david.a.jencks@gmail.com
wrote:
Maybe even “Our second release _confirmed_…”…
David Jencks
On Oct 4, 2021, at 12:33 PM, David Blevins <
david.blevins@gmail.com>
wrote:
- Our first release proved releasing both 8 & 9 together can be
impractical. The TomEE 8 binaries were a dud, only TomEE 9 was
released.
There was communication overhead and made for a potentially
confusing
release. The TomEE 9 binaries are still very limited.
- Our first release proved releasing both 8 & 9 together can be
impractical. The TomEE 8 binaries were released, we didn't release
TomEE
9. It's the second time we've done that. We've only managed one
TomEE 9
release in the last 10 months.
This was supposed to start "our second
release". CopyPasteException :)
-David
--
Richard Zowalla, M.Sc.
Research Associate, PhD Student | Medical Informatics
Hochschule Heilbronn – University of Applied Sciences
Max-Planck-Str. 39
D-74081 Heilbronn
phone: +49 7131 504 6791 (zur Zeit nicht via Telefon erreichbar)
mail: richard.zowalla@hs-heilbronn.de
web: https://www.mi.hs-heilbronn.de/
Re: TomEE Jakarta project - have we reach the limit?
Posted by Jean-Louis Monteiro <jl...@tomitribe.com>.
Thanks for the additional thoughts Thomas.
I'll wait for some more thoughts and I might create a poll and let everyone
to vote on what they like.
--
Jean-Louis Monteiro
http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
http://www.tomitribe.com
On Tue, Oct 5, 2021 at 10:59 AM Thomas Andraschko <
andraschko.thomas@gmail.com> wrote:
> yep
> i think we have to maintain 8.0.x anyway as its the last javax release and
> we cant expect that everyone does a fast migration
>
> IMO the following is the best way:
> - branch 8.0.x
> - make master 9.0 and rename javax -> jakarta
> - branch 9.0 after everything is working fine
> - working on 10.0 in master
> - maintain 8.0 and 10.0 and dont maintain the 9.0 branch
>
>
> Am Di., 5. Okt. 2021 um 10:53 Uhr schrieb Jean-Louis Monteiro <
> jlmonteiro@tomitribe.com>:
>
> > Agreed ...
> >
> > 1.7.x - EOL
> > 7.0.x and 7.1.x - mostly similar so if we maintain one, we should
> maintain
> > the other.
> >
> > But I agree that 1 actively developed version (TomEE master/TomEE 9.x)
> and
> > 1 maintained version (TomEE 8.x) is good.
> > That'd be my choice.
> > --
> > Jean-Louis Monteiro
> > http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> > http://www.tomitribe.com
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 5, 2021 at 10:37 AM Zowalla, Richard <
> > richard.zowalla@hs-heilbronn.de> wrote:
> >
> > > +1
> > >
> > > I am wondering, if we still maintain 7.0.x, 7.1.x in the future (1.7.x
> > > is eol, I guess) ? Maintenance cost will rise with every additional
> > > version branch. The last releases of 7.0.x and 7.1.x are 1 year old...
> > > but this is maybe another discussion.
> > >
> > >
> > > Am Dienstag, dem 05.10.2021 um 10:05 +0200 schrieb Jean-Louis Monteiro:
> > > > Thanks everyone.
> > > >
> > > > Same feeling here.
> > > > I think we tried and pushed it as much as we could.
> > > >
> > > > What we can do is make sure we fix remaining failures on TCK and
> > > > support
> > > > JDK 17 with TomEE.
> > > > Do a release, branch for maintenance and move master to jakarta.
> > > >
> > > > Does it sound like an acceptable plan?
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Jean-Louis Monteiro
> > > > http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> > > > http://www.tomitribe.com
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Oct 5, 2021 at 7:56 AM David Jencks <
> david.a.jencks@gmail.com
> > > > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Maybe even “Our second release _confirmed_…”…
> > > > >
> > > > > David Jencks
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Oct 4, 2021, at 12:33 PM, David Blevins <
> > > > > > david.blevins@gmail.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > - Our first release proved releasing both 8 & 9 together can be
> > > > > impractical. The TomEE 8 binaries were a dud, only TomEE 9 was
> > > > > released.
> > > > > There was communication overhead and made for a potentially
> > > > > confusing
> > > > > release. The TomEE 9 binaries are still very limited.
> > > > > > > - Our first release proved releasing both 8 & 9 together can be
> > > > > impractical. The TomEE 8 binaries were released, we didn't release
> > > > > TomEE
> > > > > 9. It's the second time we've done that. We've only managed one
> > > > > TomEE 9
> > > > > release in the last 10 months.
> > > > > > This was supposed to start "our second
> > > > > > release". CopyPasteException :)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -David
> > > > > >
> > > --
> > > Richard Zowalla, M.Sc.
> > > Research Associate, PhD Student | Medical Informatics
> > >
> > > Hochschule Heilbronn – University of Applied Sciences
> > > Max-Planck-Str. 39
> > > D-74081 Heilbronn
> > > phone: +49 7131 504 6791 (zur Zeit nicht via Telefon erreichbar)
> > > mail: richard.zowalla@hs-heilbronn.de
> > > web: https://www.mi.hs-heilbronn.de/
> > >
> >
>
Re: TomEE Jakarta project - have we reach the limit?
Posted by Thomas Andraschko <an...@gmail.com>.
yep
i think we have to maintain 8.0.x anyway as its the last javax release and
we cant expect that everyone does a fast migration
IMO the following is the best way:
- branch 8.0.x
- make master 9.0 and rename javax -> jakarta
- branch 9.0 after everything is working fine
- working on 10.0 in master
- maintain 8.0 and 10.0 and dont maintain the 9.0 branch
Am Di., 5. Okt. 2021 um 10:53 Uhr schrieb Jean-Louis Monteiro <
jlmonteiro@tomitribe.com>:
> Agreed ...
>
> 1.7.x - EOL
> 7.0.x and 7.1.x - mostly similar so if we maintain one, we should maintain
> the other.
>
> But I agree that 1 actively developed version (TomEE master/TomEE 9.x) and
> 1 maintained version (TomEE 8.x) is good.
> That'd be my choice.
> --
> Jean-Louis Monteiro
> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> http://www.tomitribe.com
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 5, 2021 at 10:37 AM Zowalla, Richard <
> richard.zowalla@hs-heilbronn.de> wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> > I am wondering, if we still maintain 7.0.x, 7.1.x in the future (1.7.x
> > is eol, I guess) ? Maintenance cost will rise with every additional
> > version branch. The last releases of 7.0.x and 7.1.x are 1 year old...
> > but this is maybe another discussion.
> >
> >
> > Am Dienstag, dem 05.10.2021 um 10:05 +0200 schrieb Jean-Louis Monteiro:
> > > Thanks everyone.
> > >
> > > Same feeling here.
> > > I think we tried and pushed it as much as we could.
> > >
> > > What we can do is make sure we fix remaining failures on TCK and
> > > support
> > > JDK 17 with TomEE.
> > > Do a release, branch for maintenance and move master to jakarta.
> > >
> > > Does it sound like an acceptable plan?
> > >
> > > --
> > > Jean-Louis Monteiro
> > > http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> > > http://www.tomitribe.com
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Oct 5, 2021 at 7:56 AM David Jencks <david.a.jencks@gmail.com
> > > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Maybe even “Our second release _confirmed_…”…
> > > >
> > > > David Jencks
> > > >
> > > > > On Oct 4, 2021, at 12:33 PM, David Blevins <
> > > > > david.blevins@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > - Our first release proved releasing both 8 & 9 together can be
> > > > impractical. The TomEE 8 binaries were a dud, only TomEE 9 was
> > > > released.
> > > > There was communication overhead and made for a potentially
> > > > confusing
> > > > release. The TomEE 9 binaries are still very limited.
> > > > > > - Our first release proved releasing both 8 & 9 together can be
> > > > impractical. The TomEE 8 binaries were released, we didn't release
> > > > TomEE
> > > > 9. It's the second time we've done that. We've only managed one
> > > > TomEE 9
> > > > release in the last 10 months.
> > > > > This was supposed to start "our second
> > > > > release". CopyPasteException :)
> > > > >
> > > > > -David
> > > > >
> > --
> > Richard Zowalla, M.Sc.
> > Research Associate, PhD Student | Medical Informatics
> >
> > Hochschule Heilbronn – University of Applied Sciences
> > Max-Planck-Str. 39
> > D-74081 Heilbronn
> > phone: +49 7131 504 6791 (zur Zeit nicht via Telefon erreichbar)
> > mail: richard.zowalla@hs-heilbronn.de
> > web: https://www.mi.hs-heilbronn.de/
> >
>
Re: TomEE Jakarta project - have we reach the limit?
Posted by Jean-Louis Monteiro <jl...@tomitribe.com>.
Agreed ...
1.7.x - EOL
7.0.x and 7.1.x - mostly similar so if we maintain one, we should maintain
the other.
But I agree that 1 actively developed version (TomEE master/TomEE 9.x) and
1 maintained version (TomEE 8.x) is good.
That'd be my choice.
--
Jean-Louis Monteiro
http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
http://www.tomitribe.com
On Tue, Oct 5, 2021 at 10:37 AM Zowalla, Richard <
richard.zowalla@hs-heilbronn.de> wrote:
> +1
>
> I am wondering, if we still maintain 7.0.x, 7.1.x in the future (1.7.x
> is eol, I guess) ? Maintenance cost will rise with every additional
> version branch. The last releases of 7.0.x and 7.1.x are 1 year old...
> but this is maybe another discussion.
>
>
> Am Dienstag, dem 05.10.2021 um 10:05 +0200 schrieb Jean-Louis Monteiro:
> > Thanks everyone.
> >
> > Same feeling here.
> > I think we tried and pushed it as much as we could.
> >
> > What we can do is make sure we fix remaining failures on TCK and
> > support
> > JDK 17 with TomEE.
> > Do a release, branch for maintenance and move master to jakarta.
> >
> > Does it sound like an acceptable plan?
> >
> > --
> > Jean-Louis Monteiro
> > http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> > http://www.tomitribe.com
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 5, 2021 at 7:56 AM David Jencks <david.a.jencks@gmail.com
> > >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Maybe even “Our second release _confirmed_…”…
> > >
> > > David Jencks
> > >
> > > > On Oct 4, 2021, at 12:33 PM, David Blevins <
> > > > david.blevins@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > - Our first release proved releasing both 8 & 9 together can be
> > > impractical. The TomEE 8 binaries were a dud, only TomEE 9 was
> > > released.
> > > There was communication overhead and made for a potentially
> > > confusing
> > > release. The TomEE 9 binaries are still very limited.
> > > > > - Our first release proved releasing both 8 & 9 together can be
> > > impractical. The TomEE 8 binaries were released, we didn't release
> > > TomEE
> > > 9. It's the second time we've done that. We've only managed one
> > > TomEE 9
> > > release in the last 10 months.
> > > > This was supposed to start "our second
> > > > release". CopyPasteException :)
> > > >
> > > > -David
> > > >
> --
> Richard Zowalla, M.Sc.
> Research Associate, PhD Student | Medical Informatics
>
> Hochschule Heilbronn – University of Applied Sciences
> Max-Planck-Str. 39
> D-74081 Heilbronn
> phone: +49 7131 504 6791 (zur Zeit nicht via Telefon erreichbar)
> mail: richard.zowalla@hs-heilbronn.de
> web: https://www.mi.hs-heilbronn.de/
>
Re: TomEE Jakarta project - have we reach the limit?
Posted by "Zowalla, Richard" <ri...@hs-heilbronn.de>.
+1
I am wondering, if we still maintain 7.0.x, 7.1.x in the future (1.7.x
is eol, I guess) ? Maintenance cost will rise with every additional
version branch. The last releases of 7.0.x and 7.1.x are 1 year old...
but this is maybe another discussion.
Am Dienstag, dem 05.10.2021 um 10:05 +0200 schrieb Jean-Louis Monteiro:
> Thanks everyone.
>
> Same feeling here.
> I think we tried and pushed it as much as we could.
>
> What we can do is make sure we fix remaining failures on TCK and
> support
> JDK 17 with TomEE.
> Do a release, branch for maintenance and move master to jakarta.
>
> Does it sound like an acceptable plan?
>
> --
> Jean-Louis Monteiro
> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> http://www.tomitribe.com
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 5, 2021 at 7:56 AM David Jencks <david.a.jencks@gmail.com
> >
> wrote:
>
> > Maybe even “Our second release _confirmed_…”…
> >
> > David Jencks
> >
> > > On Oct 4, 2021, at 12:33 PM, David Blevins <
> > > david.blevins@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > - Our first release proved releasing both 8 & 9 together can be
> > impractical. The TomEE 8 binaries were a dud, only TomEE 9 was
> > released.
> > There was communication overhead and made for a potentially
> > confusing
> > release. The TomEE 9 binaries are still very limited.
> > > > - Our first release proved releasing both 8 & 9 together can be
> > impractical. The TomEE 8 binaries were released, we didn't release
> > TomEE
> > 9. It's the second time we've done that. We've only managed one
> > TomEE 9
> > release in the last 10 months.
> > > This was supposed to start "our second
> > > release". CopyPasteException :)
> > >
> > > -David
> > >
--
Richard Zowalla, M.Sc.
Research Associate, PhD Student | Medical Informatics
Hochschule Heilbronn – University of Applied Sciences
Max-Planck-Str. 39
D-74081 Heilbronn
phone: +49 7131 504 6791 (zur Zeit nicht via Telefon erreichbar)
mail: richard.zowalla@hs-heilbronn.de
web: https://www.mi.hs-heilbronn.de/
Re: TomEE Jakarta project - have we reach the limit?
Posted by Jean-Louis Monteiro <jl...@tomitribe.com>.
Thanks everyone.
Same feeling here.
I think we tried and pushed it as much as we could.
What we can do is make sure we fix remaining failures on TCK and support
JDK 17 with TomEE.
Do a release, branch for maintenance and move master to jakarta.
Does it sound like an acceptable plan?
--
Jean-Louis Monteiro
http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
http://www.tomitribe.com
On Tue, Oct 5, 2021 at 7:56 AM David Jencks <da...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Maybe even “Our second release _confirmed_…”…
>
> David Jencks
>
> > On Oct 4, 2021, at 12:33 PM, David Blevins <da...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> - Our first release proved releasing both 8 & 9 together can be
> impractical. The TomEE 8 binaries were a dud, only TomEE 9 was released.
> There was communication overhead and made for a potentially confusing
> release. The TomEE 9 binaries are still very limited.
> >>
> >> - Our first release proved releasing both 8 & 9 together can be
> impractical. The TomEE 8 binaries were released, we didn't release TomEE
> 9. It's the second time we've done that. We've only managed one TomEE 9
> release in the last 10 months.
> >
> > This was supposed to start "our second release". CopyPasteException :)
> >
> > -David
> >
>
>
Re: TomEE Jakarta project - have we reach the limit?
Posted by David Jencks <da...@gmail.com>.
Maybe even “Our second release _confirmed_…”…
David Jencks
> On Oct 4, 2021, at 12:33 PM, David Blevins <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> - Our first release proved releasing both 8 & 9 together can be impractical. The TomEE 8 binaries were a dud, only TomEE 9 was released. There was communication overhead and made for a potentially confusing release. The TomEE 9 binaries are still very limited.
>>
>> - Our first release proved releasing both 8 & 9 together can be impractical. The TomEE 8 binaries were released, we didn't release TomEE 9. It's the second time we've done that. We've only managed one TomEE 9 release in the last 10 months.
>
> This was supposed to start "our second release". CopyPasteException :)
>
> -David
>
Re: TomEE Jakarta project - have we reach the limit?
Posted by David Blevins <da...@gmail.com>.
> - Our first release proved releasing both 8 & 9 together can be impractical. The TomEE 8 binaries were a dud, only TomEE 9 was released. There was communication overhead and made for a potentially confusing release. The TomEE 9 binaries are still very limited.
>
> - Our first release proved releasing both 8 & 9 together can be impractical. The TomEE 8 binaries were released, we didn't release TomEE 9. It's the second time we've done that. We've only managed one TomEE 9 release in the last 10 months.
This was supposed to start "our second release". CopyPasteException :)
-David
Re: TomEE Jakarta project - have we reach the limit?
Posted by David Blevins <da...@gmail.com>.
> On Oct 1, 2021, at 4:25 AM, Jean-Louis Monteiro <jl...@tomitribe.com> wrote:
>
> I was about to add that into tomee-jakarta by having the same approach so
> we don't have the cost of maintaining both TomEE 8 and TomEE source tree.
>
> But looks like to do that we end up by duplicating pretty much the entire
> TomEE tree but the examples.
>
> Is it worth it?
> Should we move master to Jakarta and leave a maintenance branch for TomEE 8?
I could probably get behind that goal. I was originally not in favor of switching master over to the jakarta namespace, but now that we have some experience I think we're more or less forced to do it.
Some things that changed my mind:
- Our first release proved releasing both 8 & 9 together can be impractical. The TomEE 8 binaries were a dud, only TomEE 9 was released. There was communication overhead and made for a potentially confusing release. The TomEE 9 binaries are still very limited.
- Our first release proved releasing both 8 & 9 together can be impractical. The TomEE 8 binaries were released, we didn't release TomEE 9. It's the second time we've done that. We've only managed one TomEE 9 release in the last 10 months.
- It's difficult to make progress on TomEE 9 without impacting TomEE 8 negatively.
- We've taken the bytecode tooling as far as we can take it. I don't see a way to get the arquillian adapters and plain maven dependencies working without a very large amount of work with odd tradeoffs. Work that will all be thrown away once we do a source rename.
I think we gave it our best shot, but likely we're at the end of the road unless we're happy to have another year of the same or we get more volunteers to do bytecode work and ensure both TomEE 8 and 9 are released together.
-David