On Nov 11, 2009, at 10:02 AM, David Blevins wrote:

> I wonder what the group would think about potentially graduating into 
> OpenEJB.  Perhaps as a subproject for this spec cycle, but with the longer 
> term goal of becoming part of the same codebase.
> 
> Vision-wise, I'd like to offer @TransactionManagement, 
> @ConcurrencyManagement, @Asynchronous, @Schedule, and various other "EJB" 
> feature sets to "WebBeans".  As well I'd like to offer Decorators and more to 
> "EJB".  I admit that I see a large number of JDCI features as next generation 
> EJB and next generation DI.  The only difference between javax.ejb and 
> javax.enterprise is that "javabean" was removed :)  I'd really like to offer 
> the industry some consistency and unity where the JCP has failed to provide 
> it.

On, Sat Jun 19 16:53:58 PDT 2010 irc.freenode.net/#openwebbeans
[14:59]  <gerdogdu> thinking to add EJB features for managed beans
[14:59]  <gerdogdu> like Resin guys doing

Door is still open on the OpenEJB side if that is a goal.  We're executing on 
the vision I mentioned above right now in OpenEJB.  I mentioned this in the 
graduation thread, but at that time there was significant interested in staying 
free from EJB.

Feel free to jump in on this thread:

  http://openejb.979440.n4.nabble.com/JCDI-sandbox-td2250998.html#a2250998

Got a sandbox there we can play in too.


-David

> 
> In terms of graduation, it really depends on where everyone's head is at in 
> terms of implementation/project independence over the long haul.  Very 
> interested in thoughts there.
> 
> 
> -David
> 
> On Nov 11, 2009, at 9:00 AM, Kevan Miller wrote:
> 
>> It's been a while since the community has discussed graduation. What are 
>> your current thoughts?
>> 
>> I've mentored about all that I can mentor... ; -)
>> 
>> From the last time I kicked off the discussion:
>> 
>> On Sep 8, 2009, at 11:00 AM, Kevan Miller wrote:
>> 
>>> IMO, this community displays nearly all of the characteristics that I would 
>>> look for from a successful Incubator project: you've successfully created 
>>> several releases while operating in a clear, open, and welcoming manner. 
>>> All of this while facing some significant challenges as the JSR 299 spec 
>>> has been an ever shifting target.
>>> 
>>> I'd like to see us moving towards graduation. To start things off, is the 
>>> community interested in becoming a top-level project? Or would you rather 
>>> graduate as a sub-project of an existing TLP?
>> 
>> I think we're ready. Graduation is going to take a concerted effort by the 
>> community. I'm certainly willing to help, but the community is going to need 
>> to help drive this.
>> 
>> --kevan
>> 
> 
> 

Reply via email to