Hello, I still don't see from which page of tomee.apache.org this new page is linked, if it is: http://openejb.staging.apache.org/tomee-version-policies.html
I know for sure that it isn't directly linked from TomEE documentation page: http://openejb.staging.apache.org/documentation.html Don't we have a missing link ? (joke on TomEE evolution ;) Alex On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 1:28 PM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <jeano...@gmail.com>wrote: > Done. > Thanks Alex. > > Jean-Louis > > > 2013/1/6 Alex The Rocker <alex.m3...@gmail.com> > > > Hello, > > > > Can this > http://openejb.staging.apache.org/tomee-version-policies.htmlpage > > be linked from official from TomEE documentation links page, if you all > > agree about its content? > > > > Alex > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 7:03 PM, Alex The Rocker <alex.m3...@gmail.com > > >wrote: > > > > > @Jean-Louis; > > > > > > How about this page: > > > http://openejb.staging.apache.org/tomee-version-policies.html > > > Is it okay for you guys? can it be linked to official TomEE > > documentation ? > > > > > > Alex. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 6:30 PM, David Blevins <david.blev...@gmail.com > > >wrote: > > > > > >> > > >> On Dec 30, 2012, at 1:42 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau < > rmannibu...@gmail.com> > > >> wrote: > > >> > > >> > Id like to break rest default config so 1.6 is better imo > > >> > > >> Why don't we have a discussion about breaking the default config. Can > > >> you post a proposal on it? > > >> > > >> > > >> -David > > >> > > >> > Le 30 déc. 2012 21:34, "Jean-Louis MONTEIRO" <jeano...@gmail.com> a > > >> écrit : > > >> > > > >> >> 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 > > >> >> > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > > -- > Jean-Louis >
