Thanks for the reply. I've split that out into a separate thread so it
doesn't hijack this one and will just give people space to object /
discuss, and then I'll move that over.

Jon


On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 11:49 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]>
wrote:

> No nees to ask to move vode over sandbox, great idea Jon.
>
> Le 19 mars 2018 12:10, "Jonathan Gallimore" <[email protected]>
> a écrit :
>
> > We used to have the concept of a sandbox which allowed folks to play with
> > different ideas https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomee/sandbox/. I it
> did
> > a
> > while back (ok, 10 years back - has it really been that long...?) for an
> > Eclipse plugin. I think we need a safe place where experimentation can
> > happen and code can be committed and worked on (that isn't just a PR). A
> > number of things in the old sandbox have moved onto other places.
> >
> > If I sent a PR and it was whisked away to Geronimo, my immediate issue
> > would be that I don't have commit access there, so I'm then restricted to
> > sending in PRs.
> >
> > Jon
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 10:04 AM, Andy Gumbrecht <
> [email protected]
> > >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I don't see TomEE as the center of the world, but somewhere where
> people
> > > should be free to work without constantly being told it's not OK to do
> > so.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 19/03/18 10:45, Mark Struberg wrote:
> > >
> > >> @Anydy and @David
> > >> Let's face it TomEE is mostly an aggregator. A great one, I really
> love
> > >> it - but still.
> > >>   For example: apart from verifying and excluding all the broken TCKs
> I
> > >> had probably 30 committs for TomEE8 which are really due to upgrades
> for
> > >> EE8. Most of them have been CDI-2.0 adoptions and adopting to Tomcat
> > >> behaviour changes.
> > >> But apart from that Romain I had about 4000 commits in all the other
> > >> projects, all for TomEE8. And there are many more people and projects
> > >> involved which just get consumed by TomEE:
> > >> * Tomcat* OpenWebBeans* MyFaces
> > >> * Johnzon* OpenJPA* BVal* log4j* commons* BatchEE
> > >> * various geronimo libs like * xbean, * geronimo-jta, *
> > >> geronimo-javamail, tons of * geronimo-specs
> > >> Folks, you have to stop thinking as TomEE as being the center of the
> > >> world. I love TomEE and it's a great aggregator and a great community.
> > >> But building TomEE is literally just the tip of the iceberg. All the
> > work
> > >> on the parts under the water - which is the vast majority - is done
> FOR
> > >> TomEE but *not* AT TomEE!So don't fight those communities but embrace
> > them.
> > >>
> > >> This is not a one way street.
> > >> We (TomEE) should be really much more active in pointing that out
> TomEE
> > >> contributors are perfectly welcome to tinker around in all the
> > downstream
> > >> projects as well. And the other way around.
> > >> We need EACH OTHER! TomEE as kind of end-user projects which adds a
> huge
> > >> adoption factor. And of course the components underneath as a rock
> solid
> > >> base.
> > >>
> > >> LieGrue,strub
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>      On Monday, 19 March 2018, 09:37:36 CET, Andy Gumbrecht <
> > >> [email protected]> wrote:
> > >>     I think that if anyone feels like contributing to TomEE then we
> > should
> > >> allow and encourage that as soon as possible. The politics of where
> > >> things should 'eventually' reside is a huge distraction and just
> serves
> > >> to block any progress at the moment - The enthusiasm dies quickly
> after
> > >> a week of back and forth. The first choice for anything should be
> TomEE,
> > >> as that is the community we serve. The first response should be thank
> > >> you, and we should accept the help offered. Then those that want to
> > >> worry about extraction and reuse should feel free to go ahead and do
> > >> that if they feel strongly enough about it. It should not be the
> > >> priority for TomEE.
> > >>
> > >> The goal should be to get TomEE on the MP board as soon as possible.
> If
> > >> that initially means TomEE 8, Java 8, and accepting a few PRs then we
> > >> should press ahead with that now. Anything that might need
> back-porting
> > >> can be addressed later.
> > >>
> > >> Andy.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On 19/03/18 01:02, David Blevins wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> On Mar 18, 2018, at 2:38 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> [email protected]
> > >
> > >>>> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Are you against/-1ing g-jwt-auth?
> > >>>>
> > >>> I wouldn't do that, but it's also clear to me the discussion in this
> > >>> thread can be significantly clearer.  Objections were made that
> weren't
> > >>> resolved.  The discussion started as what do "we" do with we meaning
> > TomEE
> > >>> and Geronimo.  At some point in the middle it was stated Geronimo has
> > >>> already made a decision.  I also have the feeling people may have
> > opinions
> > >>> that are in-between a full TomEE vs Geronimo decision, such as
> wanting
> > to
> > >>> put work into inching closer to get a better view before deciding.
> > >>>
> > >>> I think all these things are fine, but we need some healthy votes so
> > >>> people can move forward with clear support.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> -David
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > > --
> > > Andy Gumbrecht
> > > https://twitter.com/AndyGeeDe
> > > http://www.tomitribe.com
> > > https://www.tomitribe.io
> > >
> > >
> > > Ubique
> > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to