> > We can definitely vote, but would be great if we can way a day or two to > discuss what we'd be voting and what our status is and how to best address > our concerns. > +1
> We all universally agree we want MP in TomEE 8 and are actively working on > it > I am not sure there is an active MP work in TomEE > Some of us see value in and are actively working on MP support in a TomEE > 7.1 in addition to TomEE 8 > >From my perspective, I would like to have fully latest MP2 in TomEE 8, not in TomEE 7.1 but I am not against it. Currently we have little power. My understanding of the concern is that we end up ignoring TomEE 8, which > is a concern I would share. > I did not understand what you mean by ignoring TomEE 8 .Can you please a bit elaborate? Who ignore? Perhaps the most effective vote would be to vote to require those who do > work on a TomEE 7.1 to also submit the same PR to TomEE 8. If a PR comes > into TomEE 7.1 only and that work is needed in TomEE 8, but there isn't a > PR, we reject it. > -1. Different people can work on TomEE 7.1 and TomEE 8. We need to differentiate TomEE 7.1 from TomEE 8. TomEE 7.1 is just in there to only include MP1. We don't want to wait TomEE 7.1 for TomEE 8. We remind the person we voted that TomEE 8 is the priority and TomEE 7.1 > work can happen as long as we don't ignore TomEE 8. > Our priority must be TomEE 8. If someone wants to submit an MicroProfile PR to TomEE 8 only, go right > ahead, those who want to see a TomEE 7.1 will have to back port it if > they're serious about a TomEE 7.1 > ++1, exactly. MP2 must be started in TomEE 8 and if want to see at TomEE 7.1, any volunteer can back port to it. Regards. Gurkan On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 2:10 AM, David Blevins <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Aug 8, 2018, at 2:48 PM, Gurkan Erdogdu <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> > >> What I don't understand on this is that if there are people willing to > do > >> the work on both, why would we stop them? Delivering to both the Java > EE 7 > >> and Java EE 8 TomEE users would be a good thing. > >> > > I am not against both Java EE 7 and Java EE 8 specific MP > implementations. > > Just need to have contribution power both on this. We can definitely add > > this option to the vote thread. So the vote will include: > > > > - Go only with MP1 with Java EE 7 (TomEE 7.1) > > - Go only with MP2 with Java EE 8 (TomEE 8.0) > > - Go for both > > We can definitely vote, but would be great if we can way a day or two to > discuss what we'd be voting and what our status is and how to best address > our concerns. > > Here's my understanding of our status. > > - We all universally agree we want MP in TomEE 8 and are actively working > on it > - Some of us see value in and are actively working on MP support in a > TomEE 7.1 in addition to TomEE 8 > > I haven't seen anyone propose a TomEE 7.1-only option. My understanding > of the concern is that we end up ignoring TomEE 8, which is a concern I > would share. > > Perhaps the most effective vote would be to vote to require those who do > work on a TomEE 7.1 to also submit the same PR to TomEE 8. If a PR comes > into TomEE 7.1 only and that work is needed in TomEE 8, but there isn't a > PR, we reject it. We remind the person we voted that TomEE 8 is the > priority and TomEE 7.1 work can happen as long as we don't ignore TomEE 8. > If someone wants to submit an MicroProfile PR to TomEE 8 only, go right > ahead, those who want to see a TomEE 7.1 will have to back port it if > they're serious about a TomEE 7.1 > > I'd certainly vote +1 for that. > > > -David > >
