> > all the TomEE 7.0 stuff would say "Java EE" not "Jakarta EE" and use > "Enterprise JavaBeans" not "Jakarta EnterpriseBeans", etc.
Agree, I overlooked the fact that spec names changed along with namespace. El mar, 12 abr 2022 a las 12:09, Zowalla, Richard (< richard.zowa...@hs-heilbronn.de>) escribió: > Makes sense, imho. Thanks for the thoughts, David. > That would simplify it for the reader. > > If we have it per version and link the per version documents from the > overall comparision, we are proabably in a good shape. > > > > Am Dienstag, dem 12.04.2022 um 10:58 -0700 schrieb David Blevins: > > Hey All, > > > > I see there's a big thread on PR#37. > > > > - https://github.com/apache/tomee-site-generator/pull/37 > > > > My gut reaction is that we might be trying to achieve the impossible > > by trying to fit every TomEE version and every Java EE/Jakarta EE > > version into one massive matrix or page. > > > > What do people think about potentially pausing that, taking a step > > back and seeing if there's a simpler approach. Often when I'm > > working on code and I notice it's getting just too big and hard to > > fit in my head or on the page in a way that makes sense, I change my > > approach. Instead of trying to solve the whole problem at once, I > > just take a slice of it that I know I'll need and work on it till > > it's clean. Then I move on and take another small slice and > > repeat. As I keep going I often find there is no more big mess, not > > because I found a better way to do it, but because I never needed it. > > > > My advice would be to give this a try. Pause the big PR#37 and shift > > gears. Instead try nailing just a basic comparison page for TomEE 9 > > that is like the one that's there, but adds the spec versions, links > > to the spec documents and the java information. > > > > I.e. we copy this page > > > > - > > > https://github.com/apache/tomee-site-generator/blob/master/src/main/jbake/content/comparison.adoc > > > > To here: > > > > - > > https://github.com/apache/tomee/commits/master/docs/comparison.adoc > > > > Then we start with adding the spec versions and the spec links and > > get that merged. Afterwards we try adding the java information, and > > get that merged. Once we have a page we all like, we move on and do > > the same for TomEE 8.0 > > > > - > > https://github.com/apache/tomee/blob/tomee-8.x/docs/comparison.adoc > > > > If we have the energy, let's do 7.1 and 7.0 since we're still > > releasing those once in a while. > > > > Each page will be of course only mentioning the specifications they > > implement. We can even use the exact spec names as they existed, so > > for example, all the TomEE 7.0 stuff would say "Java EE" not "Jakarta > > EE" and use "Enterprise JavaBeans" not "Jakarta EnterpriseBeans", > > etc. > > > > Once we get individual pages for each TomEE version, we will likely > > have a different perspective on what we need for the main comparison > > page. Possibly we'll need very little as the individual pages will > > be doing most the hard work. > > > > > > Thoughts? > > > > > > -David > > > > > On Apr 5, 2022, at 5:42 AM, Swell <souheil.sul...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > Thanks Richard, > > > > > > two pages can be pre-reviewed : > > > • compare-jakarta-versions.html > > > • comparison.html > > > i believe we can choose only one of the two for release. which one > > > do you find more readable ? > > > (they differ in the detailed list of jakarta specs.) > > > > > > i'll try to update my page later to better reflect JRE ranges and > > > your warnings on JRE/ASM. > > > i have reflected JL work regarding MicroProfile dependencies in my > > > draft PR. > > > > > > > > > also we could update TomEE 8.x to MicroProfile 4.1, > > > (SmallRye?) but is it worth ? > > > > > > Swell > > > > > > On Tue, 5 Apr 2022 at 11:49, Zowalla, Richard < > > > richard.zowa...@hs-heilbronn.de> wrote: > > > Hi Swell, > > > > > > > my TomEE 8.x is working on both JDK 11 and 17 with a small app. > > > > What > > > features can be broken with wrong JDK/ASM version ? > > > > > > (1) If you are running with an unsupported version of ASM the > > > server > > > might not startup or the deployment of applications will simply not > > > work. Most of often this will result in an exception (rather early) > > > telling you, that ASM does not support this specific version of > > > Java. > > > > > > (2) Our scripts are rather defensively written, but you might > > > encounter > > > issues with unsupported JVM flags (between major JDK versions) or > > > certain other mechanisms do not work (i.e. usages of Unsafe, > > > Illegal > > > Reflective Access, etc.) > > > > > > Most often this happens with "too new" JDKs (i.e. JDK 18-GA) as we > > > need > > > some time to adjust / test or wait for transient libs to be updated > > > (matter of resources). > > > > > > > TomEE works on both JDK and JRE, but can use more memory/cache in > > > JDK. is this right ? Is JDK to be preferred ? > > > > > > We are running TomEE with JRE (not JDK) in production and/or in > > > container environments (due to size). AFAIK our TomEE docker images > > > also rely on JRE (rather than JDK). > > > > > > > * TomEE implements MicroProfile 2.0 on branches 7.x, 8.x, 9.x ? > > > > or > > > other MP versions ? > > > > > > AFAIK we only support MP 2.x at the moment (in 7.x, 8.x and 9.x). > > > JL is > > > currently working on upgrading MP on 9.x with the smallray impl to > > > make > > > it work with the Jakarata namespace change. > > > > > > Hope it helps > > > Richard > > > > > > > > > Am Samstag, dem 02.04.2022 um 16:09 +0200 schrieb Swell: > > > > Thanks ! > > > > > > > > i've put some work for the website comparison pages on a draft > > > > PR > > > > https://github.com/apache/tomee-site-generator/pull/37 > > > > though I lack some info : > > > > > > > > * TomEE works on both JDK and JRE, but can use more memory/cache > > > > in > > > > JDK. is this right ? Is JDK to be preferred ? > > > > * my TomEE 8.x is working on both JDK 11 and 17 with a small app. > > > > What features can be broken with wrong JDK/ASM version ? > > > > * TomEE implements MicroProfile 2.0 on branches 7.x, 8.x, 9.x ? > > > > or > > > > other MP versions ? > > > > > > > > the pages i made are not perfect for maintenance, but i have > > > > ideas to > > > > improve them, > > > > for example : maybe not include the "spec versions" columns on my > > > > "per-tomee-major" pages. that would help avoid mistakes when > > > > realising a new major like 10, 11... > > > > > > > > maybe drop the per-major idea and keep only the main comparison > > > > page > > > > ? > > > > maybe keep the main comparison page but add a new one to display > > > > the > > > > complete mapping between TomEE versions and Specs versions ? > > > > > > > > i'am not ready to automate their generation, i did not see if the > > > > Jakarta Spec Process does release specs numbers in a format like > > > > JSON, > > > > that would be easier to parse than HTML > > > > https://projects.eclipse.org/releases/jakarta-10 > > > > the TomEE visitors could rely on these eclipse pages to identify > > > > the > > > > Jakarta version they need before choosing a TomEE version. > > > > > > > > the text i wrote is to be changed too. > > > > > > > > Open to your suggestions :-) > > > > Swell > > > > > -- Atentamente: César Hernández.
