+1

Still don't see why a vote is needed. Let's move on and work on TomEE now

--
Jean-Louis Monteiro
http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
http://www.tomitribe.com

On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 11:05 AM, Roberto Cortez <radcor...@yahoo.com.invalid
> wrote:

> +1
>
> > On 9 Aug 2018, at 09:54, Matthew Broadhead 
> > <matthew.broadh...@nbmlaw.co.uk.INVALID>
> wrote:
> >
> > +0
> >
> > if TomEE 8 is available then i will use that, and probably never install
> 7.1.x.  they both target java 8 anyway so it won't help if you are stuck on
> a lower version?
> >
> > On 09/08/18 08:08, David Blevins wrote:
> >> For a few months we've discussed doing and not doing a TomEE 7 flavored
> release of MicroProfile 1.x for Java EE 7 users on Java 8, tentatively
> versioned TomEE 7.1.
> >>
> >> Earliest email with TomEE 7.1 in the subject is around April, though I
> vaguely recall it mentioned before.  I recall seeing a request from Mark to
> wait on it till after 7.0.5 was released.  That's now out and a TomEE 7.1.x
> branch has been created and being actively worked on.
> >>
> >> There seem to be concerns that this will draw attention away from TomEE
> 8, which is understandable, and some sentiment that this work should stop
> and everyone focus on TomEE 8.  I haven't seen anyone suggest not working
> on TomEE 8, so I'll assume that as a constant that doesn't need to be voted
> on.
> >>
> >> As the concern is largely resources, I propose the following compromise:
> >>
> >>  - MicroProfile related PRs that can possibly apply to TomEE 8 must be
> merged to master *before* the equivalent can be merged to TomEE 7.1.x. In
> short, everyone must work on TomEE 8.
> >>
> >>  - Those who wish to focus time only on TomEE 8 may do so, someone else
> can merge the PR to 7.1.x if they have the energy.  In short, only the
> willing need work on TomEE 7.1.x
> >>
> >> With this in mind, the vote:
> >>
> >>   +1 Allow work on TomEE 7.1 to proceed with the above two conditions
> >>  +-O Abstain or don't feel strongly
> >>   -1 I have a better idea
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> -David
> >>
> >
>
>

Reply via email to