Thanks for the feedback. We encourage everyone to vote, as a user, as a contributor, as a contributor or as anyone willing to help the project. User perspective is also important for the project.
Jean-Louis -- Jean-Louis Monteiro http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro http://www.tomitribe.com On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 4:49 PM, ross.cohen <ross.cohen...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Le 29 avr. 2016 00:49, "ross.cohen" <ross.cohen.rc@> a écrit : > > > > 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. > > > > Clearly stated we were speaking of master in the thread when Jon asked so I > kind of disagree there. > > > 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). > > > > --This doesnt mean anything to me like that. Being ASF implies ASF quality > --and we cant claim anything Oracle related so Im lost with what you target > --there. > > To the vast majority of prospective users any major version change will > strongly > imply that Tomee conforms to the JEE 7 Web spec. The fact that Tomee is > jumping > from 2.x to 7.0 seals the deal. I would guess that most people here voted > for the > move to a "7" release under the impression that it would conform to to JEE > 7 > web > spec -- it's impossible to imagine any other reason for skipping the > intervening > integers. > > I'm not a legal person, but it seems like one should be able to say that > Tomee > conforms to the specifications belonging to the JEE standard released by > Oracle. > It is a mere statement of fact. It would be nice to have an "Apache > Certified" > statement and symbol/stamp; for some reason this sort of thing helps a lot > of > managers sleep better at night. Remember that programmers often have to > fight > for the software they want to use. Frequently, our managers are not very > well > informed, and are easily flim-flammed by Leviathan's representatives. > It's > only later > that they learn that Leviathan "quality and support" means endless emails > and > incompetence -- until a month later when someone with a brain finally looks > at your > problem. By that time, of course, you have found a wonky, brittle > work-around. > > Compared to the behemoths, the support here is god-like and wonderful. But > for > some reason the promises of Leviathan feel more real to most managers than > the > actualities of open source. Like deer, most IT managers are wonderfully > timid, and > easily startled into Leviathan's camp. Once there, like donkeys, they are > wonderfully > adept at planting their feet, if they feel you are trying to lead them > towards anything > remotely "unsafe". So, if Tomee could have some kind of clear > statement/guarantee > of conformity to the specs (in whatever form), it would really, really, > really, help us > guys in the corporate trenches fight against the Leviathan FUD. > > > --We ll clearly not get any EE 7 compatibility on the site. Best we can do > is > --to list API/impl we have of EE 7. > > This would be a great place to begin! It is something I can bring my > manager. > > --Last point: your vote would have been very welcomed but now vote passed > and > --I strongly think we can discuss for 10 years without providing anything > to > --users so more time passes more I think we could use the date as version > it > --wouldnt be an issue but we have to release Final versions to stop holding > --tomee from being considered by vendors and tools. > > Although I have been following Tomee closely for over a year, I haven't > contributed > anything to the project yet, so I didn't really feel entitled to vote. > Thus, I see your > invitation as incredibly generous -- too generous, perhaps. I was just a > little surprised > at the outcome. > > Cheers! > > > > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://tomee-openejb.979440.n4.nabble.com/7-0-0-release-vote-tp4678284p4678328.html > Sent from the TomEE Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >
