> On Sep 8, 2017, at 2:23 PM, Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de> wrote: > > This 'implied' 3rd block was actually never implied nor up for discussion. > Not quite sure what I did word wrong to give you that impression. > But rest ensurred that it was never intended that way!
>> Paraphrasing, I’ve seen “we agreed to do it in Geronimo, why are you >> attempting to move forward elsewhere” > > We do have existing code in geronimo. Used all over the place in other > projects. There is now no confusion anymore as the G server is dead. So what > would moving those existing projects to TomEE add for all those projects? Note, I’m not requesting the remaining Geronimo bits to move to TomEE. It has been mentioned several times, particularly by Jeff and I would support it, but for the sake of avoiding confusion I’m not referring to this. On this particular subject, I have a gut feeling David Jencks would really love to see Geronimo legacy live on in some form, so if there isn’t unanimous support for moving things, I don’t want to push on that rock. Where I do get confused is statements like this on the thread of adding new non-ASF code into TomEE: > On Aug 11, 2017, at 11:43 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > 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? When statements like this are said, even proceeding any formal vote on the G side, it blurs things for me. I can’t see the “we” being cited and it likely colors people’s comments and votes. This very well can be just my confusion. If the “we” is just Romain. That’s fine. If there is a “we” and this perspective that Geronimo is the "official umbrella project now” to the exclusion of all other Apache projects, then I’d really like to talk about it. -David
