Hi Alex, You are all welcome to share your needs and what you expect (and also to help if you can ;-)).
IMO, TomEE 1.x.y is only Java EE 6 dedicated. The work on Java EE 7 will start Q2 2013 I guess or a bit after and it should produce the 2.x.y of TomEE. Java EE 8, dunno for the moment, maybe a TomEE 3.x.y Back to 1.x.y, the third digit is usually for maintenance (bugfix and improvements). The second one is for new features and significant changes. Between 1.0.x and 1.5.0, we had a discussion all together and agreed that there were lot of new feature and improvements (see release notes where all should be clearer). We wanted to emphasis that huge work and decided to jump in the version. I'm not proposing to jump again, I just wanted to know what community and users have in mind and like to see in next release to decide what numbers are better. If 1.5.2 is a new maintenance release and does not contain any big new feature, I'm all ok to use that numbers. I'm not aware of Tomcat producing a new version since our last release, but the 1.5.2 could embedded the new release if available as well as other dependency upgrades. I have in mind at least CXF and maybe OpenJPA. Is it clearer? If I badly interpreted your thoughts, apologize and lemme know. Jean-Louis 2012/12/30 Alex The Rocker <alex.m3...@gmail.com> > Jean-Louis: > > This is a very serious topic for my company: we're releasing a product > which we document that it is supported with Apache TomEE+ 1.5.x, x=>1. The > rationale for allowing our customers to use an higher "fix" version is to > benefit from Apache Tomcat security fixes. > > When our product was based on Apache Tomcat instead of TomEE we had the > same type of support policy : for example we wrote that we supported Apache > Tomcat 7.0x, x=>23. > > I am very concerned by a TomEE 1.6.0 version which could put an end to the > 1.5.x series. > > Would it be possible for Apache TomEE team to stick to Apache Tomcat > version conventions (too late for the middle number which could have stayed > to '0', so we should be at version 1.0.3 instead of 1.5.1) ? > > Otherwise, if a 1.6.0 version is actually planned (for Java EE 8 alpha > support, why not), then please keep 1.5.x series actives for a (long). > > Thanks, > Alex. > > > > On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 11:44 PM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <jeano...@gmail.com > >wrote: > > > Hi guys, > > > > That are some painful bugs in 1.5.1. > > They are fixed in the trunk. > > > > So the question here is: what are the plans for next releases? > > > > We have basically 2 options: > > 1. try to push a new 1.5.2 by February or so > > 2. push a 1.6.0 > > > > We don't have so much new features for now, so I'm quite sure, we will > get > > a 1.5.2 out. > > Thoughts are welcome. > > > > Another question is what to put in? > > As said previously, there are number of bugs fixed in trunk. > > Anything else you wanna get in? > > Any work (improvement, bugfixes, dependency updates, etc)? > > > > > > -- > > Jean-Louis > > > -- Jean-Louis
