> On Mar 31, 2022, at 2:01 PM, Swell <souheil.sul...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > It would be great to have per-major comparison pages. And in fact, there are, > but their rendering are broken. i have some free time to work on it. here are > the existing urls I thought using > > https://tomee.apache.org/tomee-8.0/docs/comparison.html > https://tomee.apache.org/tomee-9.0/docs/comparison.html
I totally forgot we had those pages and it looks like I'm the one who put them there (and left them broken for 3 years): - https://github.com/apache/tomee/commit/f779264f01c80e632649ff6dbe75f9b78bd359f0#diff-96bf7bb0a199a293ca950988b58249419c2a2cf667bf100750553c49671f9c63 Getting those pages updated in at least the 8 and 9 branch would be great! Here's where they live: - https://github.com/apache/tomee/blob/master/docs/comparison.adoc - https://github.com/apache/tomee/blob/tomee-8.x/docs/comparison.adoc > listing the required Java and Jakarta specs version could be nice too, i cant > take ideas from https://tomcat.apache.org/whichversion.html That's exactly the page I was thinking of :) We have so many specs, I think we'd want to keep our table the way it is now with the spec names going up and down on the left rather than across the top, but we can definitely add the spec versions like they have. An interesting aspect of the Java versions is Tomcat has "11 and later", where we don't really have that luxury. We use the ASM library to do a lot of work and that library will actual fail if you throw it a new Java version it wasn't explicitly written to handle. So for a long time we could support Java 8, but not Java 11 for example. We only just added support for Java 17 in TomEE 8.0.8. I'm open to ideas on how we show that kind of thing. Maybe we need a table of the JDKs and "TomEE 8.0.8 and later" and similar written after each JDK version? > > the main comparison page would have 2 synthesis table (flavors comparison and > versions comparison) > the per-major ones would have the detailed tables (specs, impls) Open to any thoughts. Feel free to hack something up. > I can put more thoughts on builds afterward :-) Sure! Welcome to the project btw! :) -David > On Thu, 31 Mar 2022 at 20:19, David Blevins <david.blev...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thank you, Swell, for helping to get those versions aligned! > > Some high-level thoughts: > > - Romain is right that we could potentially use the TomEE-Maven-Plugin to > build the various distributions. Swell also had some ideas on simplifying > how the distributions are built. We've also had a couple threads about > completely eliminating the war file distributions. Now that the master > branch is TomEE 9.0 and that is not final yet, do we want to take the time to > work on this? > > - I've long thought it was odd our TomEE MicroProfile distribution was > larger than the TomEE WebProfile distribution. For TomEE 10, which will need > to have a Jakarta EE 10 Core Profile implementation, perhaps we could strip > down the TomEE MicroProfile distribution so it doubles as Jakarta EE Core > Profile / MicroProfile? (again not really for TomEE 9, but soon). > > - Implementations are different for the various branches. In TomEE 8 we're > using Apache BVal, but for TomEE 9 we're using Hibernate Bean Validator > because it supports the jakarta namespace and is compliant. > > - Comparison page. Given each version has differences in things it > implements and the implementations used, do we want a specialized version of > the comparison.html page that we put in each branches documentation? Since > it would be dedicated to a specific TomEE version, we could not just list the > specification names, but also the specification versions and link to the > actual specifications themselves. Thinking there could be URLs like these > > - https://tomee.apache.org/tomee-8.0/comparison.html > - https://tomee.apache.org/tomee-9.0/comparison.html > - https://tomee.apache.org/tomee-10.0/comparison.html (future) > > We could potentially also list the Java version required. > > The generic comparison.html page at https://tomee.apache.org/comparison.html > could either stay as a high-level view, or simply forward to the latest > stable version (which would be TomEE 8 at the moment). We could also take a > different direction with the generic https://tomee.apache.org/comparison.html > page and have it be kind of a marketing page with fancy graphics to talk > about each distribution at a high level. Sort of like the "TomEE Flavors" > section of our website main page (https://tomee.apache.org) but a more > complete page where there is kind of an image and description of each > distribution. People can then use the more detailed comparison pages for the > full list of 40+ specifications we support. > > Thoughts? > > > -- > David Blevins > http://twitter.com/dblevins > http://www.tomitribe.com > > > On Mar 31, 2022, at 12:56 AM, Zowalla, Richard > > <richard.zowa...@hs-heilbronn.de> wrote: > > > > I went ahead and merged the changes by Swell. @Swell: Thank you!! > > Cherry picked them to master (9.x) as well. > > > > Now the distributions contain the libs specified on the website. > > > > Gruß > > Richard > > > > Am Montag, dem 28.03.2022 um 08:18 +0000 schrieb Zowalla, Richard: > >> As we merged the comparision page, we should now tackle: > >> https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/828 > >> > >> There was a discussion regarding the original intentions of plume. > >> If we agree, that "Those distributions are supposed to be the same > >> minus the JPA and JSF providers.", then we should go a-head and merge > >> it + port it to master. > >> > >> Gruß > >> Richard > >> > >> > >> Am Freitag, dem 25.03.2022 um 11:29 +0100 schrieb Swell: > >>> Thanks for your kind feedback. > >>> > >>> @Richard, I'll gladly change Tomee Plume pom to include BatchEE, PR > >>> : > >>> in > >>> progress with a blocker i can also resolve. > >>> > >>> @David, about the flavors page, i think your suggestions are > >>> simpler > >>> and > >>> better, applied them on names consistency and added a table of > >>> implementations. > >>> > >>> what need for this list of implementations ? > >>> * For my students => My usual scenario is that i need to remind > >>> them > >>> of > >>> what is provided by Tomee vs other servers. "they dont need HK2 nor > >>> Jersey > >>> if they have the Plus flavor." > >>> * For the general web site visitors => I wonder if people would > >>> prefer perf > >>> metrics and tck results, rather than comparing what is provided by > >>> Tomee vs > >>> others. provided a web capture just for fun : > >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/13041580/image-2022-03-25-11-18-14-708.png > >>> > >>> i still believe the list of implementations is needed to know what > >>> Tomee > >>> provides, but David's suggestion is clearer. > >>> here is the current version of the web page in the PR : > >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/13041581/image-2022-03-25-11-19-03-406.png > >>> > >>> On Fri, 25 Mar 2022 at 06:18, Zowalla, Richard < > >>> richard.zowa...@hs-heilbronn.de> wrote: > >>> > >>>> Hi all, > >>>> > >>>> Thanks for your mail and your work in making the page more clear, > >>>> Swell! Your work is very much appreciated. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> Total side note to the wider dev list, we really need to get > >>>>> JBatch > >>>>> into Plume! Those distributions are supposed to be the same > >>>>> minus > >>>>> the JPA and JSF providers. > >>>> > >>>> I created TOMEE-3871 [1] for this one. > >>>> > >>>> @Swell Let me know, if you like to provide a PR for master / > >>>> tomee- > >>>> 8.x > >>>> branch to fix it. We can then assign you the Jira :) > >>>> > >>>> It basically boils down to adding "batchee-jbatch" (runtime) to > >>>> the > >>>> "tomee-plume-webapp". The references in the "boms" are then > >>>> automatically re-generated, if you conduct a quick build: > >>>> > >>>> mvn -U -Pquick -DskipTests -Dsurefire.useFile=false > >>>> -DdisableXmlReport=true -DuniqueVersion=false -ff -Dassemble > >>>> -DfailIfNoTests=false clean install > >>>> > >>>> If you are unsure how to proceed with it, feel free to ask. We > >>>> are > >>>> happy to help. > >>>> > >>>> Gruß > >>>> Richard > >>>> > >>>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3871 > >>>> > >>>> Am Donnerstag, dem 24.03.2022 um 11:48 -0700 schrieb David > >>>> Blevins: > >>>>>> On Mar 19, 2022, at 2:30 AM, Swell <souheil.sul...@gmail.com> > >>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Regarding Tomee website : one web page mislead me to believe > >>>>>> that > >>>>>> Tomee Plus > >>>>>> includes Tomee Plume, and it made it hard for me to > >>>>>> understand > >>>>>> why > >>>>>> my > >>>>>> webapp was not loading. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I believe it could mislead others and its why I wanted to > >>>>>> suggest > >>>>>> some > >>>>>> changes on its content to better show the delta between > >>>>>> flavors. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Currently the flavors page does not differentiate between > >>>>>> Micro > >>>>>> and > >>>>>> Web > >>>>>> profiles, nor does it tell Plume includes EclipseLink when > >>>>>> Plus > >>>>>> does not. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I took time to write a page I believe could be usefull to > >>>>>> Tomee > >>>>>> users, a > >>>>>> screenshot is linked below, the visitors could benefit from > >>>>>> my > >>>>>> additional > >>>>>> table for synthesis of deltas. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/13041318/image-2022-03-18-20-36-25-938.png > >>>>> Hi Swell, > >>>>> > >>>>> Thank you so much for taking the time to put so much thought > >>>>> into > >>>>> this work. We are truly lucky :) > >>>>> > >>>>> I love that you included the MicroProfile detail, that was > >>>>> definitely > >>>>> missing and badly needed. As the table is quite large already, > >>>>> that > >>>>> terse summary at the top is a very nice improvement and likely > >>>>> to > >>>>> help people see the big picture significantly faster. > >>>>> > >>>>> In the first table, I like the way you used "Jakarta JSF > >>>>> Implementation" and list the implementations by name. For > >>>>> consistency, can we use that same approach for the line > >>>>> above? Instead of it saying "EclipseLink" and having a > >>>>> checkmark, > >>>>> could we also have it say "Jakarta Persistence (JPA) > >>>>> Implementation" > >>>>> and then put "OpenJPA, OpenJPA, EcliseLink, OpenJPA" in > >>>>> there? We > >>>>> can do that in both the top and bottom tables. > >>>>> > >>>>> On listing OpenEJB in the bottom table. I think it's fine I'm > >>>>> not > >>>>> the best judge of what people think is useful information as > >>>>> I've > >>>>> been working on the project too long and everything is > >>>>> "obvious." Do > >>>>> you find it helpful to see OpenEJB listed even though it's the > >>>>> same > >>>>> for all distributions. Do you think we possibly need a table > >>>>> entirely dedicated to implementations? (OpenWebBeans, Geronimo > >>>>> Transaction Manager, BVal, etc) > >>>>> > >>>>> Some minor trademark corrections: > >>>>> > >>>>> - "GlassFish Mojarra" is "Eclipse Mojarra" > >>>>> - "Jakarta JSF" is "Jakarta Faces", but "Jakarta Faces (JSF)" > >>>>> is > >>>>> completely fine and encouraged so people are aware of its new > >>>>> and > >>>>> former name. > >>>>> - "Jakarta EJB" is "Jakarta Enterprise Beans", but "Jakarta > >>>>> Enterprise Beans (EJB)" is completely fine and encouraged so > >>>>> people > >>>>> are aware of its new and former name. > >>>>> - "Jakarta JPA" is "Jakarta Persistence", but "Jakarta > >>>>> Persistence > >>>>> (JPA)" is completely fine and encouraged so people are aware of > >>>>> its > >>>>> new and former name. > >>>>> - OpenJPA, OpenEJB and MyFaces are all Apache trademarks, so > >>>>> if > >>>>> we're going to say "Apache MyFaces" on the page, we need to > >>>>> also > >>>>> use > >>>>> "Apache OpenJPA" and "Apache OpenEJB" > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Total side note to the wider dev list, we really need to get > >>>>> JBatch > >>>>> into Plume! Those distributions are supposed to be the same > >>>>> minus > >>>>> the JPA and JSF providers. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Thank you so much, again, for all work on this and being > >>>>> patient > >>>>> getting bounced around between different repos and ultimately > >>>>> onto > >>>>> the list. We'd be happy to see you post as often as you like > >>>>> :) > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> -David > >>>>> >
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
