Hi All,
Good to see talk on moving TomEE into the MP scene.
The MP landing page of interest is this one:
https://wiki.eclipse.org/MicroProfile/Implementation
As we can see, TomEE is a long way behind here.
I feel that we need to act 'really fast' to get TomEE on that board as
soon as possible, even if it is 'just' a distribution with mp-config
enabled - That would give us two hits on that board with little effort,
mp 1.0 and config 1.2.
I don't think we should be waiting to get as much in as possible before
releasing something, it should be our priority to release something now.
That could easily be TomEE 7, and 8 soon after. In fact, the longer we
wait, the less significant TomEE will become to MP.
I don't think it would be too hard to maintain the 7 and 8 versions by
adding mp-impls as soon as we have them available.
As you know, all I wanted to do recently was to open up mp modules space
for this work to begin on getting TomEE up to spec - Again, not to
create implementations or libraries. I still believe this is a logical
approach, to have a module per spec in TomEE. These modules should be
focusing on getting the current impls of choice (Wherever they come
from!) integrated into TomEE, and passing the corresponding TCKs
provided by MP. I'd personally like to see TomEE MP modules high up in
the project hierarchy and not buried, but I will leave that up to you
guys for obvious reasons. I'd just ask that any one of you guys to get
the ball rolling on this so that we can maybe divide the work?
Andy.
On 27/02/18 16:02, Roberto Cortez wrote:
Thanks Romain,
I'll have a look into JL work.
Cheers,Roberto On Tuesday, February 27, 2018, 2:53:50 PM GMT, Romain Manni-Bucau
<rmannibu...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Roberto,
JL already has some work which is close to be imported in Geronimo
dedicated project so maybe ensure you don't duplicate the effort here.
Also we'll need to have a tomee MP module (which can compiles or assemble
modules) on Java 8 otherwise we can't support any MP spec since they all
require java 8 quite hardly in their API so probably time to add to
apache-tomee module a mp assembly which would import java 8 modules (vs wp
and fp will not).
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
<https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
<http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
<https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance>
2018-02-27 15:38 GMT+01:00 Roberto Cortez <radcor...@yahoo.com.invalid>:
Hi,
Thank you for the discussion.
I do believe that we should provide a MP 1.3 implementation under TomEE 7.
As we know, moving from major versions is sometimes slow in a lot of
organizations, even if the upgrade only requires a zip file.
So, I'll look into integrating some of the work under TomEE 7 and then 8.
Cheers,Roberto On Thursday, February 22, 2018, 9:02:44 AM GMT, Romain
Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com> wrote:
2018-02-22 9:45 GMT+01:00 Gurkan Erdogdu <gurkanerdo...@yahoo.com.
invalid>:
Even if we use IRC or similar tools, we need to get all of these
discussion to our mailing lists. ASF main idea is to use the mailing
lists
for these discussions. I think such decisions taken from other places
really kills the projects and community
You read it wrong, the decisions have been done on the list the asf way.
The community and user activity doesn't always go through the list since it
requires steps to enter whereas twitter and irc are no step - guess it is
why we miss activities on the list.
CheersGurkan
On Thursday, February 22, 2018, 11:38:02 AM GMT+3, Romain Manni-Bucau
<
rmannibu...@gmail.com> wrote:
2018-02-22 9:35 GMT+01:00 Gurkan Erdogdu <gurkanerdo...@yahoo.com.
invalid>:
After all the same (active!) people are involved in most of those
projects anyway. When you have lots of similar projects, it is not easy
to
create and maintain the healthy community , only couple of active
developers works on these projects without general community consensus
.
I
prefer to have one project which covers all of these similar
technologies.
Except it doesn't work in practise I think - we tried and failed - cause
communities are actually different. Sadly it goes through IRC/twitter a
lot
and seems mails are no more mainstream but core dev are the same, users
are
not.
If we see a cost we can't pay we'll probably merge them but it is clearly
not the case today so no real point merging them and loosing users.
CheersGurkan
On Thursday, February 22, 2018, 11:10:57 AM GMT+3, Mark Struberg
<strub...@yahoo.de.INVALID> wrote:
> 4. Hammock: real MP server based on cdi (tomee cant be that)
Well, MP defines just a _minimal_ requirement and a set of additional
technologies.TomEE can easily implement these and call itself a
MicroProfile server.
BUT: it will be really hard to trim down TomEE to this bare minimum
what
the MP specification defines. It will always be bigger than Meecrowave
or
Hammock! But does 'bigger' mean fat? No, 40MB is certainly more weight
than
9MB, but in most cases it doesn't even matter.In some it does though.
For me there is a clear and concise way of scaling:
* if you only need servlets and no DI -> use pure Tomcat * if you also
need CDI and JAX-RS -> use Meecrowave (or Hammock)* if you need XA,
JAX-WS,
EJB, etc -> use TomEE
After all the same (active!) people are involved in most of those
projects
anyway.
LieGrue,strub
On Thursday, 22 February 2018, 07:54:27 CET, Romain Manni-Bucau <
rmannibu...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Gurkan,
All has clarified after your mail:
1. Geronimo: ee* umbrella project for subspec
2. Meecrowave: light cxf/tomcat/johnzon/owb server (no MP target by
itself!), name is not even on the website.
3. TomEE: javaee server + tomee or RA specific projects
4. Hammock: real MP server based on cdi (tomee cant be that)
So there is no real confusion since the overlaps are very small once
you
checked out the projects IMHO.
Le 22 févr. 2018 07:43, "Gurkan Erdogdu" <gurkanerdo...@yahoo.com.
invalid>
a écrit :
Hi allSeveral months ago I advised to create another profile under
TomEE
(or create another TLP project) instead of duplicating the work in
Meecrowave project but Romain and Mark rejected. Now, come to the same
point :) There are lots of separate projects (or subprojects, or
modules)
in Apache (Geronimo, TomEE, Meecrowave. I think all of these modules
must
belong to TomEE. Lots of users are confused with this
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/9d6058ba109f27cd74c29cd93bebfc
e29160145723407e203e43d145@%3Cdev.openwebbeans.apache.org%3E
CheersGurkan
On Thursday, February 22, 2018, 12:41:19 AM GMT+3, Romain
Manni-Bucau
<
rmannibu...@gmail.com> wrote:
Le 21 févr. 2018 22:33, "Bruno Baptista" <bruno...@gmail.com> a
écrit :
Hi All,
Is it a given that in the future we will use on TomEE both:
https://github.com/apache/geronimo-config
https://github.com/apache/geronimo-safeguard
Can we assume that from now on?
In the MP distro probably yes. Stack (dependencies) will pby be refined
for
safeguard since current one is not that friendly for tomee IMHO -
tomcat
classloading part + size - but not yet a blocker. Config is good for a
tomee-mp.
Cheers
Bruno Baptista
http://twitter.com/brunobat_
On 21-02-2018 18:49, Roberto Cortez wrote:
Hi guys,
I've been looking a little bit in how to use some of the existent
Apache
MP implementations with TomEE and here are some ideas / conclusions.
MicroProfile Configuration:Using https://github.com/apache/
geronimo-config
.
Just adding the jar, plus API to TomEE libs seems to be enough.
MicroProfile Fault Tolerance:Using https://github
.com/apache/geronimo-safeguard. Added the jars and the API to TomEE
libs
and also required to set TomEE configuration
tomee.webapp.classloader.
enrichment.prefixes
to safeguard-impl. This is to add the required CDI Beans that are
part
of
safeguards into the webapp context. With this, it seems to work just
fine.
If this would be part of the dist, I guess we would need to add the
required CDI Beans into org.apache.openejb.cdi.CdiScanner.
MicroProfile Rest Client:Apache CXF added a MP Rest Client module.
The
issue is that it is added into the 3.2.x line, which is JAX-RS 2.1.
If
we
look into the MP spec, the Rest Client should be compatible with
JAX-RS
2.0, which is implemented in CFX 3.1.x line. Upgrading TomEE to CFX
3.2.x
doesn't really work due to the JAX-RS 2.1 dependency. As a
workaround,
I've
also tried to use just the CFX 3.2.x module lib MP Rest Client, but
there
is some dependent code. Made a few local changed and got it to work,
but
ideally, the MP Rest client should be ported back to CFX 3.1.x to
support
MP 1.3.
Couldn't find any other Apache implementations for the other MP
specs.
I've also think that it could be interesting to distribute a TomEE
flavour
with just the MP stuff, to slim down the binary.
Any thoughts?
Cheers,Roberto
--
Andy Gumbrecht
https://twitter.com/AndyGeeDe
http://www.tomitribe.com
https://www.tomitribe.io
Ubique
