did the same and got an enthousistic moment, didnt last :(
Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Tomitriber <http://www.tomitribe.com> | JavaEE Factory <https://javaeefactory-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com> 2016-05-02 14:31 GMT+02:00 Andy Gumbrecht <agumbre...@tomitribe.com>: > Yep, misleading use of the word 'OR' on this page - > http://hibernate.org/community/license/ - "Hibernate projects are licensed > under either the LGPL 2.1 or the ASL 2.0" > > On 2 May 2016 at 14:05, Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > 2016-05-02 14:00 GMT+02:00 Andy Gumbrecht <agumbre...@tomitribe.com>: > > > > > I still feel we are due another Milestone release until TomEE is a > little > > > closer to the mark. There needs to be a really strong statement as to > > what > > > is available and what is not. There has already been some negative > > feedback > > > from power users that expected more, and were disappointed to find > > missing > > > features they expected to find merely based on the 7.x label - Wrongly > > > thinking that TomEE EE7 support was complete (Because we haven't really > > > told them). > > > > > > > > Fully agree that's why it has been stated tomee 7 != javaee 7. We also > got > > very negative feedback and worse than negative feedbacks -> blockers to > not > > have a version without "M". You are free to do a milestone if you want > and > > even a 8.0.0 when we get certified. In the meantime I see only harmful > > reasons to block all people waiting on a not milestone (including > vendors). > > > > Said otherwise: I try to push the concrete path vs the philosophical one. > > > > > > > Would there be a problem distributing the latest Hibernate (ASL) with > > > TomEE? - Even if some features would need unwrapping and documenting. > > > > > > > > it is still mentionned being lgpl 2.1 on their website. validator is asl > > AFAIK cause of JCP but orm is not. Did you find another source? > > > > > > > Andy. > > > > > > On 2 May 2016 at 13:48, Roberto Cortez <radcor...@yahoo.com.invalid> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Some JAX-RS tests are using JPA 2.1 features which is not supported > > yet. > > > > From: John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org> > > > > To: dev@tomee.apache.org > > > > Sent: Monday, May 2, 2016 12:11 PM > > > > Subject: Re: 7.0.0 release vote > > > > > > > > On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 2:44 AM Romain Manni-Bucau < > > rmannibu...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Not portable test, jpa on not jpa tests etc. We pass really more > > tests > > > > > AFAIK. > > > > > > > > > > > > Could you elaborate on that a little? What is not portable? If you > > want > > > to > > > > raise issues in our ticket system please feel free: > > > > https://github.com/javaee-samples/javaee7-samples/issues > > > > > > > > Or if you want to just say them, I can put them into github. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Le 2 mai 2016 05:48, "David Blevins" <david.blev...@gmail.com> a > > > écrit : > > > > > > > > > > > No worries on the many posts. Thank you for the Java EE 7 > samples > > > > > checkup > > > > > > :) > > > > > > > > > > > > It appears we fail 35% of the JAX-RS 2.0 tests. Do we know what > is > > > > > > preventing us from passing those tests? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > David Blevins > > > > > > http://twitter.com/dblevins > > > > > > http://www.tomitribe.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > On May 1, 2016, at 6:42 PM, John D. Ament < > johndam...@apache.org > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sorry for so many posts :-) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > TomEE Plus 7.0.0-M3 passes 238/338 tests in the suite. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > John > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, May 1, 2016 at 9:30 PM John D. Ament < > > > johndam...@apache.org> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> I ended up changing the version and updating the code. I ran > > the > > > > > tests, > > > > > > >> you can see the output in this gist: > > > > > > >> > > > https://gist.github.com/johnament/2443e79836605a913159b14295681536 > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> TomEE Plus fails at about 100 tests. > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> John > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> On Sun, May 1, 2016 at 8:10 PM John D. Ament < > > > johndam...@apache.org > > > > > > > > > > > >> wrote: > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>> If it helps any, I can push up the latest TomEE version to > the > > > > TomEE > > > > > > >>> profile: > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/javaee-samples/javaee7-samples/blob/master/pom.xml#L690 > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> John > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> On Sun, May 1, 2016 at 8:07 PM David Blevins < > > > > > david.blev...@gmail.com> > > > > > > >>> wrote: > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>>> In terms of statements of compliance, which of these Java > EE 7 > > > > > samples > > > > > > >>>> will currently run successfully? > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > >>>> - https://github.com/javaee-samples/javaee7-samples < > > > > > > >>>> https://github.com/javaee-samples/javaee7-samples> > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > >>>> -- > > > > > > >>>> David Blevins > > > > > > >>>> http://twitter.com/dblevins > > > > > > >>>> http://www.tomitribe.com > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > >>>>> On Apr 28, 2016, at 6:19 AM, ross.cohen < > > > ross.cohen...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> wrote: > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > >>>>> Actually, it looks like a 7.0 release means different > things > > to > > > > > > >>>> different > > > > > > >>>>> people. Romain, you took everyone's approval of the idea > of > > a > > > > > 7.0.0 > > > > > > >>>> release > > > > > > >>>>> to be an approval of your particular version of a 7.0.0 > > > release, > > > > > > which > > > > > > >>>> it > > > > > > >>>>> clearly was not. Looks to me like a finer-grained vote is > > > needed > > > > > to > > > > > > >>>> figure > > > > > > >>>>> out exactly what people want as part of 7.0.0 release. > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > >>>>> Personally, I think David is correct in saying that a > release > > > > > without > > > > > > >>>> some > > > > > > >>>>> kind of positive JEE 7 compatibility statement is a serious > > > > > mistake. > > > > > > >>>> I know > > > > > > >>>>> the TCK is out of the question right now, but that simply > > means > > > > you > > > > > > >>>> need to > > > > > > >>>>> invent an alternative compatibility statement: > > > "Apache-Certified > > > > > > >>>> Compliant > > > > > > >>>>> to Web Profile Specifications" (or some such). > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > >>>>> -- > > > > > > >>>>> View this message in context: > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://tomee-openejb.979440.n4.nabble.com/7-0-0-release-vote-tp4678284.html > > > > > > >>>>> Sent from the TomEE Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Andy Gumbrecht > > > https://twitter.com/AndyGeeDe > > > http://www.tomitribe.com > > > > > > > > > -- > Andy Gumbrecht > https://twitter.com/AndyGeeDe > http://www.tomitribe.com >
