> On Mar 8, 2017, at 10:44 AM, Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de> wrote: > > Alan, I understand that you don't want to put much more energy into this > project. That is totally understandable and fine. > But while you are PMC chair you still cannot declare that the project is dead > as long as there are enough PMC members still active to keep the project > going.
Let me be perfectly clear. I am not declaring this project dead. I have started a long delayed public discussion about possibly moving Geronimo to the Attic. We’ve had this discussion many times over the years on the private PMC list, out of concern of spooking potential public interest. Now, I am declaring that it’s time to discuss this publicly; my opening of the discussion to the public spurred at the request of an ASF board member. The questions you ask below, have they not already been asked, privately and publicly, multiple times over the past half decade? Can you provide your opinion as to how many more unanswered calls to action must take place before the project can feel comfortable donating the used bits of Geronimo to the active OSS projects that actually use them? Before the project embarks on yet another SOS it is important to know what is your concrete criteria that the project can use to honestly declare to the ASF board and corporate members that there is an active community here. It is also important to know what is your concrete criteria for deciding that a reasonable effort has been made and it’s time to wind down. Keep in mind that both criteria can be applied to what efforts and results have already taken place over the past decade. Details as to what is different from this effort from what has been done in the past would be helpful to garner consensus. These are not hard requirements being dictated by me, but a suggestion to prepare us for what will inevitably be asked of us should the project soldier on. In addition to a consensus that an effort should be made, there should be a consensus on clear and transparent criteria for failure as well as success. > Before we dump the project I suggest we start with an analysis of where we > are right now. > > What about starting look into > .) Who is still active and willing to continue Geronimo as a ee-commons > project? > .) Which project parts of the project are of some shared interest and might > be good to get some maintenance love and some realistic chance that this is > gonna happening? > > txs and LieGrue, > strub > > >> Am 08.03.2017 um 16:38 schrieb Alan Cabrera <l...@toolazydogs.com>: >> >> I agree and I even acknowledged that below, but what I feel Mark and you are >> not acknowledging is that the interest/activity is for a smaller subset of >> JEE. Of that subset, even you list the OSS projects that are supporting the >> JEE bits that are still relevant. They have active communities and are even >> likely to be using our implementation of our specs, but that is not >> reflective of the viability of Geronimo as an active JEE project at the ASF. >> >> Let us keep in mind that the raison d’être of Geronimo is the complete >> implementation of the JEE standard. The JEE spec licensing that the project >> is bound to goes through excruciating lengths to make sure that the spec is >> implemented in toto and not piecemeal. Given that the overwhelming bulk of >> the code is simply an inclusion of external OSS projects, when the existing >> active OSS projects are factored out there’s not a lot left. There’s no >> denying that much of what’s left is good technology. It’s just not enough >> to jumpstart a new active OSS community. And this is the crux of the >> matter, community. >> >> Does Geronimo still have good technology? Yes. >> >> When one factors out the existing OSS overlap, is it enough to jumpstart a >> new active community? No. >> >> A few engineers applying patches once a year is not an active community. To >> be sure the downstream OSS projects are appreciative. However, what’s the >> point? The engineering activity here is really a proxy for other OSS >> projects and not indicative of the viability of Geronimo as an active ASF >> project. Things get fixed and released, but in the end the wider community >> goes to the other OSS projects to consume those artifacts. >> >> Geronimo had a great run. It made significant contributions to the >> industry. However, the relevancy of the JEE spec has wained and the dearth >> of activity is concrete proof of that. >> >> With that said, this does not prevent a set of enterprising engineers with >> “can do” attitudes to pick over the bones that are in the Attic and create >> another application server. But that effort, IMO, will need to be borne in >> the Incubator. >> >> >> Regards, >> Alan >> >> >>> On Mar 8, 2017, at 1:34 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>> I share that vision (the one of Mark). >>> >>> The ee-commons part is really used and still active (even if in maintenance >>> mode for several parts) and we need to ensure other projects can still rely >>> on it (karaf, tomee, owb, meecrowave, openjpa, ... plus several open source >>> ones). >>> >>> EE is also not dead, likely no more trendy since server side techno is no >>> more a challenge but still a real need. >>> >>> Geronimo AppService not being really developped or maintained anymore I can >>> see it being frozen (attic or not is a detail IMO) but other parts are >>> still a very good fit for Geronimo community IMO. >>> >>> >>> Romain Manni-Bucau >>> @rmannibucau | Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn | JavaEE Factory >>> >>> 2017-03-08 10:26 GMT+01:00 Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de>: >>> I see no lack of interest in Java EE to be honest. Of course Microservices >>> are currently spilled high on the hype cycle, but that will quickly blow up >>> imo. >>> MS architecture is only very good for a certain kind of application. For >>> most business apps the granularity is way too fine grain and the missing TX >>> handling is often a showstopper (even if Managers don't see this yet). >>> >>> You are certainly right that there is a lack of interest in the *huge* >>> big-iron app servers! >>> So yes, TomEE, Meecrowave etc fill the sweet spot which is interesting for >>> 85% of apps. >>> >>> I also do not have a problem with the missing TCK. Of course it would be >>> better to have one. But the only real progress is currently in CDI and BVal >>> and those TCKs are available under ALv2 even. >>> >>> The main problem imo is that the Geronimo server part is not actively >>> maintained anymore and OSGi is not a really good fit for JavaEE anyway. Not >>> that OSGi itself is bad, but it's not a good fit. >>> Don't get me wrong, the Geronimo AppServer was a big step 14 years ago, and >>> all the people involved in this effort back then layed a rock solid >>> fundament for all that came after that. But the architecture is still quite >>> outdated imo and it didn't get maintained for way too long. >>> >>> >>> Otoh there is really a lot of good technology available inside the geronimo >>> project. >>> >>> * geronimo-jta >>> * javamail >>> * xbean (including finder, scanner etc) >>> * the specs >>> and quite a few other nice parts and they still get committs and love. >>> >>> I'd definitly keep them alive. >>> >>> I'm aware that quite some older PMC members have historically been >>> interested in the Geronimo AppServer and not in maintaining the ee-commons >>> part of the geronimo project. >>> But instead of dumping the whole project I'd say we just retire the >>> Geronimo AppServer and consolidate and focus on the single pieces. There >>> are potentially other things like Sirona-incubating which we could move >>> over as sub-projects even. >>> >>> Of course I perfectly understand if some of the older PMC members which are >>> not interested in the adopted roadmap want to retire. >>> >>> txs for all the hard work! >>> >>> LieGrue, >>> strub >>> >>> >>>> Am 07.03.2017 um 22:44 schrieb Alan Cabrera <l...@toolazydogs.com>: >>>> >>>> IMO, consultants and researchers are the earthworms of a vibrant OS >>>> community that meets the standards sought after at the ASF. I don’t see >>>> how we’re going to attract them. While the ideas posited on the mailing >>>> lists are pretty interesting, I just don’t see any of the ideas attracting >>>> a larger active community. The reasons for this are >>>> • the lack of interest in JEE >>>> • inability to use a reasonably current JEE TCK >>>> • the size and age of the legacy code base >>>> • project members unable to commit time resources to mentor new >>>> members >>>> When one reads about JEE not being “dead yet”, one is actually reading >>>> about a very small subset of the JEE spec. To be sure, there are >>>> interesting problems still to be solved within certain silos of JEE. I >>>> can’t think of anything that would apply to the entire pantheon of JEE >>>> bits; imo TomEE is already focused on the sweet spot of JEE bits that are >>>> still relevant. One is hard pressed to think of any JEE sub-system in >>>> Geronimo that is not already separate project. The reality is that >>>> Geronimo was an amalgam of OSS projects and the industry has preserved >>>> those JEE bits that are still relevant. The "value add", in no small >>>> part, of Geronimo was the comprehensive testing of the JEE pantheon in >>>> toto via the TCK. >>>> >>>> Given that we cannot use a reasonably current JEE TCK, the project is >>>> prevented from engaging in a role of JEE-commons of sorts. Frankly, even >>>> if we were to get the current JEE TCK, nobody really cares anymore and, as >>>> I mentioned above, the interesting JEE bits are already being worked on >>>> elsewhere with their own specific TCKs. >>>> >>>> The size and age of the codebase makes it virtually impenetrable. When >>>> one precludes spec commits, I think the last real commit has been about a >>>> half a decade ago; I wouldn’t be surprised if it was longer. I personally >>>> have been knee deep in it recently but find spelunking through it very >>>> daunting. I’d rather spend any free time I have in some greenfield >>>> endeavor. >>>> >>>> I’m certain that other project members and passersby are of the same mind. >>>> Since I have such little time to do greenfield coding, I have even less >>>> time to mentor someone who is interested in tinkering with the code base. >>>> I’ve no doubt that others are of the same mind on this as well; witness >>>> the dearth of replies to inquiries on this list. >>>> >>>> There is a lot of blood, sweat, and tears in this project. I, for one, am >>>> honored to have been able to work with the world’s brightest coders on the >>>> planet. I have a lot of great memories, and hangovers, of our once >>>> vibrant community and it’s very hard for me to start this thread. I think >>>> we should shutdown. If anyone had a real interest in any kind of >>>> resurrection it would have happened by now. >>>> >>>> If we have consensus on moving to the Attic, I will start a vote. How >>>> things are “wound down” will be discussed in a separate thread, soon to >>>> follow. >>>> >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> Alan Cabrera >>>> V.P. Apache Geronimo >>>> >>>> P.S. Please resist the urge hop in and administer CPR. Before jumping on >>>> the table, be brutally honest and ask yourself if you are operating on >>>> actionable facts, or fond well earned memories. >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >
