It was mostly discussed on the list and with committs starting with October or so.
I also like to emphase that we have the tomcat integration since almost the beginning. We just missed the bundling. But this was really frequently asked for! So from this aspect it's just a small enhancement over what we already do since 2009. But since Tomcat and OWB has different release cycles it did not make sense to do it in the owb/trunk but it must get it's own independent release cycle. And thus a new SVN root (simply because of how Maven works). Regarding Incubator or not: Incubator is for new _external_ work. All the work of Meecrowave is done by OWB committers inside OWB. And again: it's not entirely new but just an enhancement over what we already provided since 2009. LieGrue, strub > Am 09.01.2017 um 09:26 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com>: > > Hi Gurkan, > > very good question ;) > > We actually debated more places - think half of the discussion was on IRC > but there was a thread there as well. > > Let me try to summurize it. > > First of all a quick reminder: meecrowave is first OWB+Tomcat+CXF (before > being microprofile which is just a buzz word today and doesn't mean more > than this). Said otherwise it is the core of any potential server today in > a smooth fashion (embeddable, presetup etc). > > Then in term of where to do it: > > - incubator: community will be OWB and/or Tomcat and/or CXF -> no point to > create a new project with the same community (we kind of get this as an > issue for several EE sub projects so we tried to avoid it) > - Tomcat: not their philosophy and goal to do more than tomcat scope > (JAX-RS and CDI are clearly out of their bounds) > - CXF: would be a good place but CDI stays core of meecrowave and not their > central knowledge yet > - TomEE: no real force there and TomEE has a few big pitfalls like being > associated with a full blown server which make most of its subprojects > eliminated before being evaluated even if not accurate > - OWB: Tomcat/OWB integration is a real plus for OWB, CXF is likely a "?" > but the CXF part is not that much in meecrowave, most of the code is > Tomcat/OWB integration and config > > We had the first discusiion on http://markmail.org/thread/vh6x3u7yt6ex2fp2 > IIRC > > > > > Romain Manni-Bucau > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog > <https://blog-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com> | Old Blog > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | > LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | JavaEE Factory > <https://javaeefactory-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com> > > 2017-01-09 9:11 GMT+01:00 Gurkan Erdogdu <gurkanerdo...@yahoo.com.invalid>: > >> Hi all >> First of all happy new year! >> As I am a founder and keen observer of the project (hope to commit much >> more time this year), I would like to ask a question regarding the new >> subproject Meecrowave. Why would we create such a sub-project under >> OpenWebBeans? From my perspective, OpenWebBeans only aim is to implement >> CDI specifications. If we would like to create a such a microprofile >> server, we may have to first write an incubator project proposal, >> http://incubator.apache.org/ >> Moreover, I think that this subproject must be under developed in Apache >> TomEE, not in OpenWebBeans. >> >> Do we have any discussion about this topic in the dev or private list that >> I did not catch? >> Regards. >> Gurkan- >> >> >> >>
