+1 to release a M1 ASAP after (4) As you already said, we need the signal for the community
Richard Zowalla <r...@apache.org> schrieb am Di., 6. Feb. 2024, 09:43: > Hi all, > > if you monitored the GitHub repository in the last few weeks, you might > have noticed, that we did some work in order to get EE10 rolling. > > As we were mostly silent on the dev@ list (which is not a good thing > and we should definitly going back to use the lest more frequently), I > want to give an update of the current EE10 progress (from my pov): > > (1) We have implemented the EE10-related concurrency changes (huge > thanks to Jon for his work in this area) and fixed all tests to make > the "full build" green. We did _not_ setup or check the related TCK > yet. > > (2) The "main" branch fully uses EE-10 APIs and we fixed every test or > itest, which failed due to this upgrade. The full build is "green", > although we do not have any numbers on the TCK. > > (3) We did setup several standalone TCKs (jsonp, jsonb, bval, sigtests, > cdi, ...) but need to do some additional work to get them "green". CXF > isn't EE-10 compatible yet (they are working on it), so the related TCK > (in a PR) does fail with EE-10 specific stuff. > > (4) We still depend on some SNAPSHOT dependencies such as BatchEE, > OpenJPA and OWB. Some of these dependencies have already VOTE threads > up, so we can expect to remove these SNAPSHOTs soon. > > (5) Thomas did migrate some real world applications to TomEE 10 > SNAPSHOT and everything works as expected. I also did some tests with > TomEE 10 and our applications are also work as expected. > > What is next? > > I think, that - after (4) is adressed - we should do a milestone (m1) > release of TomEE soon. This is because the community needs a signal, > that we are activley working on getting a TomEE 10 up and running. > Otherwise, I think, that we might give the impression, that people > cannot expect a release (and even if it is only a milestone) in the > next time and switch to other container implementations, which would be > sad (imho). > > I know, that we are not passing the TCK with this SNAPSHOT nor that we > have exact numbers for it. I know, that it needs a lof of work to set > it up and pass it. > > But honestly, I think, that given our current lack of resources, it > would be a good thing to have something up for testing (even if it is > only a milestone and even if it does not pass the TCK). We can work on > compliance for the next milestone. > > What do you think? Do I miss something? > > Gruß > Richard >
