Le jeu. 9 août 2018 à 07:53, Gurkan Erdogdu <[email protected]> a écrit :

> >
> > 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.
>

+1, we must also keep in mind there was no activity on MP impl in TomEE
except jwt auth which was mainly a fork
and has still some clean up to do (sout etc). The concern here is the
possible investment and being disruptive to try to do
a 7.1 which requires 4 (or 7 depending the target) impl compared to just
focus on TomEE 8 which has all of them.


>
> 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.
>

+1


>
>
> 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
> >
> >
>

Reply via email to