We already released a TomEE 8 M1 with MP 1.3 support. And in reality, MP 2.x is the one we should be targeting with TomEE 8, since we have CDI 2.0.
> On 7 Dec 2018, at 15:49, Otávio Gonçalves de Santana <[email protected]> > wrote: > > JL, I like baby steps. > Maybe, keep MP 1.3, release a TomEE 8 RC-2, then upgrade the version to MP > 2.0. > > On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 1:40 PM Jean-Louis Monteiro <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Let's revive this discussion ... >> >> We are working on build stability (see other thread). >> I was digging into an issue where there is a mismatch between the API we >> pick in TomEE 8.x (master) which is for the moment MP 1.3 compliant. >> >> Unfortunately we have upgraded CXF which is now rest-client 1.1 as opposed >> to 1.0 before. As a result, the TCK fails because of a >> NoSuchMethodException. >> >> So what do we target in terms of TomEE 8.x (master)? >> Do we stay MP 1.3 or MP 2.0 or else? >> >> Thoughts? >> >> >> -- >> Jean-Louis Monteiro >> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro >> http://www.tomitribe.com >> >> >> On Tue, Dec 4, 2018 at 11:24 PM Roberto Cortez <[email protected] >>> >> wrote: >> >>> Good question. >>> >>> I think the community could help with the following topics: >>> >>> - Test the new MP dependencies in your projects. You can build the >>> project with PR (until is not merged) and try it out. >>> >>> - Contribute with additional tests outside the scope of the TCK. Might >> be >>> tricky, since you need to read both the TCK and Spec to figure out what >> is >>> missing. For instance, JWT spec mentions that "MicroProfile JWT >>> implementations are required to throw a `DeploymentException` if both >>> `mp.jwt.verify.publickey` and `mp.jwt.verify.publickey.location` are >>> supplied.” I believe the TCK doesn’t test this scenario. You need to go >> out >>> there to find them. >>> >>> - Contribute with samples showing a particular feature of MP. We don’t >>> have samples around OpenAPI or OpenTracing, so these are good candidates. >>> >>> - Help on Fault Tolerance implementation for 1.1. This should be our >> main >>> concern. Until this is done, we cannot rely say we are MP 2.0 compliant >> (or >>> 2.x for that matter). >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Roberto >>> >>>> On 4 Dec 2018, at 21:52, David Blevins <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>>> >>>> How can people help? >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> David Blevins >>>> http://twitter.com/dblevins >>>> http://www.tomitribe.com >>>> >>>>> On Dec 4, 2018, at 11:30 AM, Roberto Cortez >> <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hi folks, >>>>> >>>>> I’ve done some work on update our implementations for MP 2.0: >>>>> https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/212 < >>> https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/212> >>>>> >>>>> With our latest implementation of JWT 1.1, we are almost there. To be >>> compliant, we are only missing Fault Tolerance 1.1. There are some >>> discussions about that on the Geronimo list. You may want to have a look >>> into it as well. >>>>> >>>>> Cheers, >>>>> Roberto >>>> >>> >>> >>
