Re: [batchee] future?

[Romain Manni-Bucau]

Think it is a bit a too negative summary ;).

On the identity part I guess we can decide it is important or consider we
got a single mail and that whatever we do this issue can always popup with
whatever  name - in particular while we stay at "Apache". So not sure
killing G solves anything at all at the end - don't forget subproject often
highlight another term than Geronimo.

Also projects are not that random nor unrelated, all together they enable
to build real applications. I understand they can look random if you just
use one or two but there is some consistency in the dark there ;).

That said I join you on the fact each subproject should get one or multiple
leads who can handle user requests in a reasonable amount of time to not
look too bad.

Any idea on adressing that?
Should we go on some automotion (on PR?)? Should we elect somebody per
subproject?

Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau  |  Blog
 | Old Blog
 | Github  |
LinkedIn  | Book



Le mer. 23 nov. 2022 à 15:37, Raymond Augé  a
écrit :

> Let's not forget that there is a branding issue that has been brought up
> over the years (most recently here [1]).
>
> My proposal for retirement [2] of Geronimo was in large part in response
> to that; but was also taking into account how low the activity is and how
> disjointed the sub-projects are and how the project itself has a rather
> confusing identity. Being a "bucket of random, unrelated subprojects" does
> not seem very constructive or appealing.
>
> I understand that this is a hard choice and a tough pill for some people
> to swallow, but taking the simple path of just ignoring the issue(s) does
> not inspire much confidence in the health of this already struggling
> project.
>
> Anyway, please don't just forget about that. Peace out!
>
> [1] https://www.mail-archive.com/dev@geronimo.apache.org/msg98301.html
> [2] https://www.mail-archive.com/dev@geronimo.apache.org/msg98304.html
>
> On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 8:32 AM Romain Manni-Bucau 
> wrote:
>
>> @François Papon  cause we are far behind and it
>> looked easier to use something already up to date (even if incomplete,
>> smallrye has a ton of SPI but overall, once implemented it works)
>>
>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>>  | Old Blog
>>  | Github
>>  | LinkedIn
>>  | Book
>> 
>>
>>
>> Le mer. 23 nov. 2022 à 14:27, Francois Papon <
>> francois.pa...@openobject.fr> a écrit :
>>
>>> Regarding our MP implementation, someone knows why the TomEE team
>>> decided to move from our to Smallrye?
>>>
>>> As TomEE is an Apache project, it can make sense to use and promote the
>>> Apache implementation of MP...
>>>
>>> regards,
>>>
>>> Francois
>>> On 23/11/2022 11:11, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
>>>
>>> In terms of storage and committers you are right but in terms of users a
>>> key difference is "will it be a new release".
>>> If you look at MP it is quite unlikely since project seems way less
>>> consummed than it was some years ago and since TomEE moves to smallrye at
>>> the same time we don't update it anymore, not sure we would do any new
>>> release.
>>> So while it is ok to keep it there, we should also communicate clearly
>>> we don't intend to do any new release if it is the case - same story than
>>> geronimo server basically.
>>>
>>>
>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>>> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>>>  | Old Blog
>>>  | Github
>>>  | LinkedIn
>>>  | Book
>>> 
>>>
>>>
>>> Le mer. 23 nov. 2022 à 11:00, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO 
>>> a écrit :
>>>
 Yeah I understand there isn't much activity, but from time to time,
 they are updated to follow specifications and they are used by other
 projects (transaction manager, batchEE, etc). So they need a home. Of
 course we can split them apart and give them to different projects, but it
 does not solve any problem. The people are the same. As soon as we allow
 all projects to contribute or even become committers here, I don't see any
 issue at the moment at least.

 Le mer. 23 nov. 2022 à 10:53, Mark Struberg via dev <
 dev@geronimo.apache.org> a écrit :

> *Overall I don't understand the recent discussions to kill all
> Geronimo projects and subprojects.*
>
> *+1*
>
> Actually I'd rather keep it here as it 

Re: [batchee] future?

[Raymond Augé]

Let's not forget that there is a branding issue that has been brought up
over the years (most recently here [1]).

My proposal for retirement [2] of Geronimo was in large part in response to
that; but was also taking into account how low the activity is and how
disjointed the sub-projects are and how the project itself has a rather
confusing identity. Being a "bucket of random, unrelated subprojects" does
not seem very constructive or appealing.

I understand that this is a hard choice and a tough pill for some people to
swallow, but taking the simple path of just ignoring the issue(s) does not
inspire much confidence in the health of this already struggling project.

Anyway, please don't just forget about that. Peace out!

[1] https://www.mail-archive.com/dev@geronimo.apache.org/msg98301.html
[2] https://www.mail-archive.com/dev@geronimo.apache.org/msg98304.html

On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 8:32 AM Romain Manni-Bucau 
wrote:

> @François Papon  cause we are far behind and it looked
> easier to use something already up to date (even if incomplete, smallrye
> has a ton of SPI but overall, once implemented it works)
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github
>  | LinkedIn
>  | Book
> 
>
>
> Le mer. 23 nov. 2022 à 14:27, Francois Papon 
> a écrit :
>
>> Regarding our MP implementation, someone knows why the TomEE team decided
>> to move from our to Smallrye?
>>
>> As TomEE is an Apache project, it can make sense to use and promote the
>> Apache implementation of MP...
>>
>> regards,
>>
>> Francois
>> On 23/11/2022 11:11, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
>>
>> In terms of storage and committers you are right but in terms of users a
>> key difference is "will it be a new release".
>> If you look at MP it is quite unlikely since project seems way less
>> consummed than it was some years ago and since TomEE moves to smallrye at
>> the same time we don't update it anymore, not sure we would do any new
>> release.
>> So while it is ok to keep it there, we should also communicate clearly we
>> don't intend to do any new release if it is the case - same story than
>> geronimo server basically.
>>
>>
>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>>  | Old Blog
>>  | Github
>>  | LinkedIn
>>  | Book
>> 
>>
>>
>> Le mer. 23 nov. 2022 à 11:00, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO  a
>> écrit :
>>
>>> Yeah I understand there isn't much activity, but from time to time, they
>>> are updated to follow specifications and they are used by other projects
>>> (transaction manager, batchEE, etc). So they need a home. Of course we can
>>> split them apart and give them to different projects, but it does not solve
>>> any problem. The people are the same. As soon as we allow all projects to
>>> contribute or even become committers here, I don't see any issue at the
>>> moment at least.
>>>
>>> Le mer. 23 nov. 2022 à 10:53, Mark Struberg via dev <
>>> dev@geronimo.apache.org> a écrit :
>>>
 *Overall I don't understand the recent discussions to kill all Geronimo
 projects and subprojects.*

 *+1*

 Actually I'd rather keep it here as it is used outside TomEE as well.

 LieGrue,
 strub


 Am 23.11.2022 um 10:15 schrieb Jean-Louis MONTEIRO >>> >:

 I've opened a thread on the TomEE side to maybe transition BatchEE to
 TomEE.

 *Overall I don't understand the recent discussions to kill all Geronimo
 projects and subprojects.*

 Le mar. 22 nov. 2022 à 23:33, Romain Manni-Bucau 
 a écrit :

> No requirement, just making it living (updating versions and spec
> impl).
>
> Le mar. 22 nov. 2022 à 23:31, Mark Struberg via dev <
> dev@geronimo.apache.org> a écrit :
>
>> I still use batchee very much. So I'd keep it well alive. Also
>> investing time on and on.
>>
>> Is there anything which is required to do?
>>
>> LieGrue,
>> strub
>>
>>
>> Am 18.11.2022 um 09:50 schrieb Francois Papon <
>> francois.pa...@openobject.fr>:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I don't have insights about how BatchEE is used today and how the
>> jbatch specification is support by others.
>>
>> +1 for freeze.
>>
>> regards,
>>
>> François
>> On 18/11/2022 08:21, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> We discussed some time ago to drop batchee as an active subproject,
>> wonder where we are now on this?
>> Do we freeze it and document we don't maintain it 

Re: [batchee] future?

[Romain Manni-Bucau]

@François Papon  cause we are far behind and it looked
easier to use something already up to date (even if incomplete, smallrye
has a ton of SPI but overall, once implemented it works)

Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau  |  Blog
 | Old Blog
 | Github  |
LinkedIn  | Book



Le mer. 23 nov. 2022 à 14:27, Francois Papon 
a écrit :

> Regarding our MP implementation, someone knows why the TomEE team decided
> to move from our to Smallrye?
>
> As TomEE is an Apache project, it can make sense to use and promote the
> Apache implementation of MP...
>
> regards,
>
> Francois
> On 23/11/2022 11:11, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
>
> In terms of storage and committers you are right but in terms of users a
> key difference is "will it be a new release".
> If you look at MP it is quite unlikely since project seems way less
> consummed than it was some years ago and since TomEE moves to smallrye at
> the same time we don't update it anymore, not sure we would do any new
> release.
> So while it is ok to keep it there, we should also communicate clearly we
> don't intend to do any new release if it is the case - same story than
> geronimo server basically.
>
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github
>  | LinkedIn
>  | Book
> 
>
>
> Le mer. 23 nov. 2022 à 11:00, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO  a
> écrit :
>
>> Yeah I understand there isn't much activity, but from time to time, they
>> are updated to follow specifications and they are used by other projects
>> (transaction manager, batchEE, etc). So they need a home. Of course we can
>> split them apart and give them to different projects, but it does not solve
>> any problem. The people are the same. As soon as we allow all projects to
>> contribute or even become committers here, I don't see any issue at the
>> moment at least.
>>
>> Le mer. 23 nov. 2022 à 10:53, Mark Struberg via dev <
>> dev@geronimo.apache.org> a écrit :
>>
>>> *Overall I don't understand the recent discussions to kill all Geronimo
>>> projects and subprojects.*
>>>
>>> *+1*
>>>
>>> Actually I'd rather keep it here as it is used outside TomEE as well.
>>>
>>> LieGrue,
>>> strub
>>>
>>>
>>> Am 23.11.2022 um 10:15 schrieb Jean-Louis MONTEIRO :
>>>
>>> I've opened a thread on the TomEE side to maybe transition BatchEE to
>>> TomEE.
>>>
>>> *Overall I don't understand the recent discussions to kill all Geronimo
>>> projects and subprojects.*
>>>
>>> Le mar. 22 nov. 2022 à 23:33, Romain Manni-Bucau 
>>> a écrit :
>>>
 No requirement, just making it living (updating versions and spec impl).

 Le mar. 22 nov. 2022 à 23:31, Mark Struberg via dev <
 dev@geronimo.apache.org> a écrit :

> I still use batchee very much. So I'd keep it well alive. Also
> investing time on and on.
>
> Is there anything which is required to do?
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
> Am 18.11.2022 um 09:50 schrieb Francois Papon <
> francois.pa...@openobject.fr>:
>
> Hi,
>
> I don't have insights about how BatchEE is used today and how the
> jbatch specification is support by others.
>
> +1 for freeze.
>
> regards,
>
> François
> On 18/11/2022 08:21, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> We discussed some time ago to drop batchee as an active subproject,
> wonder where we are now on this?
> Do we freeze it and document we don't maintain it anymore?
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github
>  | LinkedIn
>  | Book
> 
>
>
>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Jean-Louis
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Jean-Louis
>>
>

Re: [batchee] future?

[Francois Papon]

Regarding our MP implementation, someone knows why the TomEE team 
decided to move from our to Smallrye?


As TomEE is an Apache project, it can make sense to use and promote the 
Apache implementation of MP...


regards,

Francois

On 23/11/2022 11:11, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
In terms of storage and committers you are right but in terms of users 
a key difference is "will it be a new release".
If you look at MP it is quite unlikely since project seems way less 
consummed than it was some years ago and since TomEE moves to smallrye 
at the same time we don't update it anymore, not sure we would do any 
new release.
So while it is ok to keep it there, we should also communicate clearly 
we don't intend to do any new release if it is the case - same story 
than geronimo server basically.



Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau  | Blog 
 | Old Blog 
 | Github 
 | LinkedIn 
 | Book 




Le mer. 23 nov. 2022 à 11:00, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO  
a écrit :


Yeah I understand there isn't much activity, but from time to
time, they are updated to follow specifications and they are used
by other projects (transaction manager, batchEE, etc). So they
need a home. Of course we can split them apart and give them to
different projects, but it does not solve any problem. The people
are the same. As soon as we allow all projects to contribute or
even become committers here, I don't see any issue at the moment
at least.

Le mer. 23 nov. 2022 à 10:53, Mark Struberg via dev
 a écrit :


/Overall I don't understand the recent discussions to kill
all Geronimo projects and subprojects./

/+1/
/
/
Actually I'd rather keep it here as it is used outside TomEE
as well.

LieGrue,
strub



Am 23.11.2022 um 10:15 schrieb Jean-Louis MONTEIRO
:

I've opened a thread on the TomEE side to maybe transition
BatchEE to TomEE.

/Overall I don't understand the recent discussions to kill
all Geronimo projects and subprojects./

Le mar. 22 nov. 2022 à 23:33, Romain Manni-Bucau
 a écrit :

No requirement, just making it living (updating versions
and spec impl).

Le mar. 22 nov. 2022 à 23:31, Mark Struberg via dev
 a écrit :

I still use batchee very much. So I'd keep it well
alive. Also investing time on and on.

Is there anything which is required to do?

LieGrue,
strub



Am 18.11.2022 um 09:50 schrieb Francois Papon
:

Hi,

I don't have insights about how BatchEE is used
today and how the jbatch specification is support by
others.

+1 for freeze.

regards,

François

On 18/11/2022 08:21, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:

Hi all,

We discussed some time ago to drop batchee as an
active subproject, wonder where we are now on this?
Do we freeze it and document we don't maintain it
anymore?

Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau  |
Blog  | Old Blog
 | Github
 | LinkedIn
 | Book






-- 
Jean-Louis




-- 
Jean-Louis

Re: [batchee] future?

[Francois Papon]

Hi,

It's good to see that this project is still used so no problem to keep 
it alive :)


regards,

Francois

On 22/11/2022 23:30, Mark Struberg via dev wrote:
I still use batchee very much. So I'd keep it well alive. Also 
investing time on and on.


Is there anything which is required to do?

LieGrue,
strub


Am 18.11.2022 um 09:50 schrieb Francois Papon 
:


Hi,

I don't have insights about how BatchEE is used today and how the 
jbatch specification is support by others.


+1 for freeze.

regards,

François

On 18/11/2022 08:21, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:

Hi all,

We discussed some time ago to drop batchee as an active subproject, 
wonder where we are now on this?

Do we freeze it and document we don't maintain it anymore?

Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau  | Blog 
 | Old Blog 
 | Github 
 | LinkedIn 
 | Book 

Re: [batchee] future?

[Romain Manni-Bucau]

Full agree JL - and btw we hijacked the thread ;).
The key point for a spec is to be inclusive and take feedback from vendors
to converge.
Factually all feedbacks were rejected from the core members in several big
specs - some went very well like JSON-B - and not only from a single
contributor but multiples so there is a clear violation of the root
contract which is to do an abstraction multi-vendors in the governance.
The MP reversion to Jakarta is even blocked by such policy, the points are
literally 'then we can't do what we want anymore'.
I fully share your worries but as a project we should think to our users
first and ensure we adopt a clear position in this context where, I have to
admit, we don't have much weight whatever we do.


Le mer. 23 nov. 2022 à 11:33, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO  a
écrit :

> This is a big issue at the moment for the java ecosystem. The industry
> spends a lot of time trying to get specifications out and users/industry to
> adopt them regardless of the application server of implementation. But the
> more we move forward the less implementations we have.
>
> MicroProfile, Jakarta, all the same. Most of the vendors now use the same
> implementation. At Apache we still have some alternatives for JPA, CDI and
> a couple more and I think it's good overall for the ecosystem. But for how
> long will it continue?
>
> Le mer. 23 nov. 2022 à 11:20, Mark Struberg via dev <
> dev@geronimo.apache.org> a écrit :
>
>> That's right. The MicroProfile stuff is not much used these days anymore.
>> Which is actually sad, because it was a good initiative.
>>
>> LieGrue,
>> strub
>>
>>
>> Am 23.11.2022 um 11:11 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau > >:
>>
>> In terms of storage and committers you are right but in terms of users a
>> key difference is "will it be a new release".
>> If you look at MP it is quite unlikely since project seems way less
>> consummed than it was some years ago and since TomEE moves to smallrye at
>> the same time we don't update it anymore, not sure we would do any new
>> release.
>> So while it is ok to keep it there, we should also communicate clearly we
>> don't intend to do any new release if it is the case - same story than
>> geronimo server basically.
>>
>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>>  | Old Blog
>>  | Github
>>  | LinkedIn
>>  | Book
>> 
>>
>>
>> Le mer. 23 nov. 2022 à 11:00, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO  a
>> écrit :
>>
>>> Yeah I understand there isn't much activity, but from time to time, they
>>> are updated to follow specifications and they are used by other projects
>>> (transaction manager, batchEE, etc). So they need a home. Of course we can
>>> split them apart and give them to different projects, but it does not solve
>>> any problem. The people are the same. As soon as we allow all projects to
>>> contribute or even become committers here, I don't see any issue at the
>>> moment at least.
>>>
>>> Le mer. 23 nov. 2022 à 10:53, Mark Struberg via dev <
>>> dev@geronimo.apache.org> a écrit :
>>>
 *Overall I don't understand the recent discussions to kill all Geronimo
 projects and subprojects.*

 *+1*

 Actually I'd rather keep it here as it is used outside TomEE as well.

 LieGrue,
 strub


 Am 23.11.2022 um 10:15 schrieb Jean-Louis MONTEIRO >>> >:

 I've opened a thread on the TomEE side to maybe transition BatchEE to
 TomEE.

 *Overall I don't understand the recent discussions to kill all Geronimo
 projects and subprojects.*

 Le mar. 22 nov. 2022 à 23:33, Romain Manni-Bucau 
 a écrit :

> No requirement, just making it living (updating versions and spec
> impl).
>
> Le mar. 22 nov. 2022 à 23:31, Mark Struberg via dev <
> dev@geronimo.apache.org> a écrit :
>
>> I still use batchee very much. So I'd keep it well alive. Also
>> investing time on and on.
>>
>> Is there anything which is required to do?
>>
>> LieGrue,
>> strub
>>
>>
>> Am 18.11.2022 um 09:50 schrieb Francois Papon <
>> francois.pa...@openobject.fr>:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I don't have insights about how BatchEE is used today and how the
>> jbatch specification is support by others.
>>
>> +1 for freeze.
>>
>> regards,
>>
>> François
>> On 18/11/2022 08:21, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> We discussed some time ago to drop batchee as an active subproject,
>> wonder where we are now on this?
>> Do we freeze it and document we don't maintain it anymore?
>>
>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>>  | Old Blog
>> 

Re: [batchee] future?

[Jean-Louis MONTEIRO]

This is a big issue at the moment for the java ecosystem. The industry
spends a lot of time trying to get specifications out and users/industry to
adopt them regardless of the application server of implementation. But the
more we move forward the less implementations we have.

MicroProfile, Jakarta, all the same. Most of the vendors now use the same
implementation. At Apache we still have some alternatives for JPA, CDI and
a couple more and I think it's good overall for the ecosystem. But for how
long will it continue?

Le mer. 23 nov. 2022 à 11:20, Mark Struberg via dev 
a écrit :

> That's right. The MicroProfile stuff is not much used these days anymore.
> Which is actually sad, because it was a good initiative.
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
> Am 23.11.2022 um 11:11 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau :
>
> In terms of storage and committers you are right but in terms of users a
> key difference is "will it be a new release".
> If you look at MP it is quite unlikely since project seems way less
> consummed than it was some years ago and since TomEE moves to smallrye at
> the same time we don't update it anymore, not sure we would do any new
> release.
> So while it is ok to keep it there, we should also communicate clearly we
> don't intend to do any new release if it is the case - same story than
> geronimo server basically.
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github
>  | LinkedIn
>  | Book
> 
>
>
> Le mer. 23 nov. 2022 à 11:00, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO  a
> écrit :
>
>> Yeah I understand there isn't much activity, but from time to time, they
>> are updated to follow specifications and they are used by other projects
>> (transaction manager, batchEE, etc). So they need a home. Of course we can
>> split them apart and give them to different projects, but it does not solve
>> any problem. The people are the same. As soon as we allow all projects to
>> contribute or even become committers here, I don't see any issue at the
>> moment at least.
>>
>> Le mer. 23 nov. 2022 à 10:53, Mark Struberg via dev <
>> dev@geronimo.apache.org> a écrit :
>>
>>> *Overall I don't understand the recent discussions to kill all Geronimo
>>> projects and subprojects.*
>>>
>>> *+1*
>>>
>>> Actually I'd rather keep it here as it is used outside TomEE as well.
>>>
>>> LieGrue,
>>> strub
>>>
>>>
>>> Am 23.11.2022 um 10:15 schrieb Jean-Louis MONTEIRO :
>>>
>>> I've opened a thread on the TomEE side to maybe transition BatchEE to
>>> TomEE.
>>>
>>> *Overall I don't understand the recent discussions to kill all Geronimo
>>> projects and subprojects.*
>>>
>>> Le mar. 22 nov. 2022 à 23:33, Romain Manni-Bucau 
>>> a écrit :
>>>
 No requirement, just making it living (updating versions and spec impl).

 Le mar. 22 nov. 2022 à 23:31, Mark Struberg via dev <
 dev@geronimo.apache.org> a écrit :

> I still use batchee very much. So I'd keep it well alive. Also
> investing time on and on.
>
> Is there anything which is required to do?
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
> Am 18.11.2022 um 09:50 schrieb Francois Papon <
> francois.pa...@openobject.fr>:
>
> Hi,
>
> I don't have insights about how BatchEE is used today and how the
> jbatch specification is support by others.
>
> +1 for freeze.
>
> regards,
>
> François
> On 18/11/2022 08:21, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> We discussed some time ago to drop batchee as an active subproject,
> wonder where we are now on this?
> Do we freeze it and document we don't maintain it anymore?
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github
>  | LinkedIn
>  | Book
> 
>
>
>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Jean-Louis
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Jean-Louis
>>
>
>

-- 
Jean-Louis

Re: [batchee] future?

[Mark Struberg via dev]

That's right. The MicroProfile stuff is not much used these days anymore.
Which is actually sad, because it was a good initiative.

LieGrue,
strub


> Am 23.11.2022 um 11:11 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau :
> 
> In terms of storage and committers you are right but in terms of users a key 
> difference is "will it be a new release".
> If you look at MP it is quite unlikely since project seems way less consummed 
> than it was some years ago and since TomEE moves to smallrye at the same time 
> we don't update it anymore, not sure we would do any new release.
> So while it is ok to keep it there, we should also communicate clearly we 
> don't intend to do any new release if it is the case - same story than 
> geronimo server basically.
> 
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog 
>  | Old Blog 
>  | Github  
> | LinkedIn  | Book 
> 
> 
> Le mer. 23 nov. 2022 à 11:00, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO  > a écrit :
>> Yeah I understand there isn't much activity, but from time to time, they are 
>> updated to follow specifications and they are used by other projects 
>> (transaction manager, batchEE, etc). So they need a home. Of course we can 
>> split them apart and give them to different projects, but it does not solve 
>> any problem. The people are the same. As soon as we allow all projects to 
>> contribute or even become committers here, I don't see any issue at the 
>> moment at least.
>> 
>> Le mer. 23 nov. 2022 à 10:53, Mark Struberg via dev > > a écrit :
 Overall I don't understand the recent discussions to kill all Geronimo 
 projects and subprojects.
>>> 
>>> +1
>>> 
>>> Actually I'd rather keep it here as it is used outside TomEE as well.
>>> 
>>> LieGrue,
>>> strub
>>> 
>>> 
 Am 23.11.2022 um 10:15 schrieb Jean-Louis MONTEIRO >>> >:
 
 I've opened a thread on the TomEE side to maybe transition BatchEE to 
 TomEE.
 
 Overall I don't understand the recent discussions to kill all Geronimo 
 projects and subprojects.
 
 Le mar. 22 nov. 2022 à 23:33, Romain Manni-Bucau >>> > a écrit :
> No requirement, just making it living (updating versions and spec impl).
> 
> Le mar. 22 nov. 2022 à 23:31, Mark Struberg via dev 
> mailto:dev@geronimo.apache.org>> a écrit :
>> I still use batchee very much. So I'd keep it well alive. Also investing 
>> time on and on. 
>> 
>> Is there anything which is required to do?
>> 
>> LieGrue,
>> strub
>> 
>> 
>>> Am 18.11.2022 um 09:50 schrieb Francois Papon 
>>> mailto:francois.pa...@openobject.fr>>:
>>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> I don't have insights about how BatchEE is used today and how the 
>>> jbatch specification is support by others.
>>> 
>>> +1 for freeze.
>>> 
>>> regards,
>>> 
>>> François
>>> 
>>> On 18/11/2022 08:21, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
 Hi all,
 
 We discussed some time ago to drop batchee as an active subproject, 
 wonder where we are now on this?
 Do we freeze it and document we don't maintain it anymore?
 
 Romain Manni-Bucau
 @rmannibucau  |  Blog 
  | Old Blog 
  | Github 
  | LinkedIn 
  | Book 
 
 
 
 -- 
 Jean-Louis
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> Jean-Louis

Re: [batchee] future?

[Romain Manni-Bucau]

In terms of storage and committers you are right but in terms of users a
key difference is "will it be a new release".
If you look at MP it is quite unlikely since project seems way less
consummed than it was some years ago and since TomEE moves to smallrye at
the same time we don't update it anymore, not sure we would do any new
release.
So while it is ok to keep it there, we should also communicate clearly we
don't intend to do any new release if it is the case - same story than
geronimo server basically.

Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau  |  Blog
 | Old Blog
 | Github  |
LinkedIn  | Book



Le mer. 23 nov. 2022 à 11:00, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO  a
écrit :

> Yeah I understand there isn't much activity, but from time to time, they
> are updated to follow specifications and they are used by other projects
> (transaction manager, batchEE, etc). So they need a home. Of course we can
> split them apart and give them to different projects, but it does not solve
> any problem. The people are the same. As soon as we allow all projects to
> contribute or even become committers here, I don't see any issue at the
> moment at least.
>
> Le mer. 23 nov. 2022 à 10:53, Mark Struberg via dev <
> dev@geronimo.apache.org> a écrit :
>
>> *Overall I don't understand the recent discussions to kill all Geronimo
>> projects and subprojects.*
>>
>> *+1*
>>
>> Actually I'd rather keep it here as it is used outside TomEE as well.
>>
>> LieGrue,
>> strub
>>
>>
>> Am 23.11.2022 um 10:15 schrieb Jean-Louis MONTEIRO :
>>
>> I've opened a thread on the TomEE side to maybe transition BatchEE to
>> TomEE.
>>
>> *Overall I don't understand the recent discussions to kill all Geronimo
>> projects and subprojects.*
>>
>> Le mar. 22 nov. 2022 à 23:33, Romain Manni-Bucau 
>> a écrit :
>>
>>> No requirement, just making it living (updating versions and spec impl).
>>>
>>> Le mar. 22 nov. 2022 à 23:31, Mark Struberg via dev <
>>> dev@geronimo.apache.org> a écrit :
>>>
 I still use batchee very much. So I'd keep it well alive. Also
 investing time on and on.

 Is there anything which is required to do?

 LieGrue,
 strub


 Am 18.11.2022 um 09:50 schrieb Francois Papon <
 francois.pa...@openobject.fr>:

 Hi,

 I don't have insights about how BatchEE is used today and how the
 jbatch specification is support by others.

 +1 for freeze.

 regards,

 François
 On 18/11/2022 08:21, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:

 Hi all,

 We discussed some time ago to drop batchee as an active subproject,
 wonder where we are now on this?
 Do we freeze it and document we don't maintain it anymore?

 Romain Manni-Bucau
 @rmannibucau  |  Blog
  | Old Blog
  | Github
  | LinkedIn
  | Book
 



>>
>> --
>> Jean-Louis
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> Jean-Louis
>

Re: [batchee] future?

[Jean-Louis MONTEIRO]

Yeah I understand there isn't much activity, but from time to time, they
are updated to follow specifications and they are used by other projects
(transaction manager, batchEE, etc). So they need a home. Of course we can
split them apart and give them to different projects, but it does not solve
any problem. The people are the same. As soon as we allow all projects to
contribute or even become committers here, I don't see any issue at the
moment at least.

Le mer. 23 nov. 2022 à 10:53, Mark Struberg via dev 
a écrit :

> *Overall I don't understand the recent discussions to kill all Geronimo
> projects and subprojects.*
>
> *+1*
>
> Actually I'd rather keep it here as it is used outside TomEE as well.
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
> Am 23.11.2022 um 10:15 schrieb Jean-Louis MONTEIRO :
>
> I've opened a thread on the TomEE side to maybe transition BatchEE to
> TomEE.
>
> *Overall I don't understand the recent discussions to kill all Geronimo
> projects and subprojects.*
>
> Le mar. 22 nov. 2022 à 23:33, Romain Manni-Bucau 
> a écrit :
>
>> No requirement, just making it living (updating versions and spec impl).
>>
>> Le mar. 22 nov. 2022 à 23:31, Mark Struberg via dev <
>> dev@geronimo.apache.org> a écrit :
>>
>>> I still use batchee very much. So I'd keep it well alive. Also investing
>>> time on and on.
>>>
>>> Is there anything which is required to do?
>>>
>>> LieGrue,
>>> strub
>>>
>>>
>>> Am 18.11.2022 um 09:50 schrieb Francois Papon <
>>> francois.pa...@openobject.fr>:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I don't have insights about how BatchEE is used today and how the jbatch
>>> specification is support by others.
>>>
>>> +1 for freeze.
>>>
>>> regards,
>>>
>>> François
>>> On 18/11/2022 08:21, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> We discussed some time ago to drop batchee as an active subproject,
>>> wonder where we are now on this?
>>> Do we freeze it and document we don't maintain it anymore?
>>>
>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>>> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>>>  | Old Blog
>>>  | Github
>>>  | LinkedIn
>>>  | Book
>>> 
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
> --
> Jean-Louis
>
>
>

-- 
Jean-Louis

Re: [batchee] future?

[Romain Manni-Bucau]

Don't think the intent was to kill everything, it is more a matter of
ensuring what we host is maintained.

BatchEE is quite late behind the spec so worth a discussion IMHO but if
there are plans to make it evolving and maintained no issue to keep it.
To be transparent one concern I have is that we don't address the PR and
user feedbacks quite well so thought it was abandonned (
https://github.com/apache/geronimo-batchee/pull/7,
https://github.com/apache/geronimo-batchee/pull/12 which can be worth a
release, etc).

The other big topic we have is about Microprofile.
The original enthusiasm got quite killed for the original people by the
governance and policies so here again we need to ensure we have some
ownership and projects are living, in particular when the main consumer
(tomee) is moving to smallrye.

Once again, the goal is not to drop everything but ensure users can rely on
the projects and projects are living.
Since we are an umbrella projects, I - maybe naively - assume we have to GC
from time to time and these discussions are only about that, no strong will
to kill anything in any case from my window.

Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau  |  Blog
 | Old Blog
 | Github  |
LinkedIn  | Book



Le mer. 23 nov. 2022 à 10:15, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO  a
écrit :

> I've opened a thread on the TomEE side to maybe transition BatchEE to
> TomEE.
>
> *Overall I don't understand the recent discussions to kill all Geronimo
> projects and subprojects.*
>
> Le mar. 22 nov. 2022 à 23:33, Romain Manni-Bucau 
> a écrit :
>
>> No requirement, just making it living (updating versions and spec impl).
>>
>> Le mar. 22 nov. 2022 à 23:31, Mark Struberg via dev <
>> dev@geronimo.apache.org> a écrit :
>>
>>> I still use batchee very much. So I'd keep it well alive. Also investing
>>> time on and on.
>>>
>>> Is there anything which is required to do?
>>>
>>> LieGrue,
>>> strub
>>>
>>>
>>> Am 18.11.2022 um 09:50 schrieb Francois Papon <
>>> francois.pa...@openobject.fr>:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I don't have insights about how BatchEE is used today and how the jbatch
>>> specification is support by others.
>>>
>>> +1 for freeze.
>>>
>>> regards,
>>>
>>> François
>>> On 18/11/2022 08:21, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> We discussed some time ago to drop batchee as an active subproject,
>>> wonder where we are now on this?
>>> Do we freeze it and document we don't maintain it anymore?
>>>
>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>>> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>>>  | Old Blog
>>>  | Github
>>>  | LinkedIn
>>>  | Book
>>> 
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
> --
> Jean-Louis
>

Re: [batchee] future?

[Mark Struberg via dev]

> Overall I don't understand the recent discussions to kill all Geronimo 
> projects and subprojects.

+1

Actually I'd rather keep it here as it is used outside TomEE as well.

LieGrue,
strub


> Am 23.11.2022 um 10:15 schrieb Jean-Louis MONTEIRO :
> 
> I've opened a thread on the TomEE side to maybe transition BatchEE to TomEE.
> 
> Overall I don't understand the recent discussions to kill all Geronimo 
> projects and subprojects.
> 
> Le mar. 22 nov. 2022 à 23:33, Romain Manni-Bucau  > a écrit :
>> No requirement, just making it living (updating versions and spec impl).
>> 
>> Le mar. 22 nov. 2022 à 23:31, Mark Struberg via dev > > a écrit :
>>> I still use batchee very much. So I'd keep it well alive. Also investing 
>>> time on and on. 
>>> 
>>> Is there anything which is required to do?
>>> 
>>> LieGrue,
>>> strub
>>> 
>>> 
 Am 18.11.2022 um 09:50 schrieb Francois Papon 
 mailto:francois.pa...@openobject.fr>>:
 
 Hi,
 
 I don't have insights about how BatchEE is used today and how the jbatch 
 specification is support by others.
 
 +1 for freeze.
 
 regards,
 
 François
 
 On 18/11/2022 08:21, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> We discussed some time ago to drop batchee as an active subproject, 
> wonder where we are now on this?
> Do we freeze it and document we don't maintain it anymore?
> 
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog 
>  | Old Blog 
>  | Github 
>  | LinkedIn 
>  | Book 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Jean-Louis

Re: [batchee] future?

[Jean-Louis MONTEIRO]

I've opened a thread on the TomEE side to maybe transition BatchEE to TomEE.

*Overall I don't understand the recent discussions to kill all Geronimo
projects and subprojects.*

Le mar. 22 nov. 2022 à 23:33, Romain Manni-Bucau  a
écrit :

> No requirement, just making it living (updating versions and spec impl).
>
> Le mar. 22 nov. 2022 à 23:31, Mark Struberg via dev <
> dev@geronimo.apache.org> a écrit :
>
>> I still use batchee very much. So I'd keep it well alive. Also investing
>> time on and on.
>>
>> Is there anything which is required to do?
>>
>> LieGrue,
>> strub
>>
>>
>> Am 18.11.2022 um 09:50 schrieb Francois Papon <
>> francois.pa...@openobject.fr>:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I don't have insights about how BatchEE is used today and how the jbatch
>> specification is support by others.
>>
>> +1 for freeze.
>>
>> regards,
>>
>> François
>> On 18/11/2022 08:21, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> We discussed some time ago to drop batchee as an active subproject,
>> wonder where we are now on this?
>> Do we freeze it and document we don't maintain it anymore?
>>
>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>>  | Old Blog
>>  | Github
>>  | LinkedIn
>>  | Book
>> 
>>
>>
>>

-- 
Jean-Louis

Re: [batchee] future?

[Romain Manni-Bucau]

No requirement, just making it living (updating versions and spec impl).

Le mar. 22 nov. 2022 à 23:31, Mark Struberg via dev 
a écrit :

> I still use batchee very much. So I'd keep it well alive. Also investing
> time on and on.
>
> Is there anything which is required to do?
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
> Am 18.11.2022 um 09:50 schrieb Francois Papon <
> francois.pa...@openobject.fr>:
>
> Hi,
>
> I don't have insights about how BatchEE is used today and how the jbatch
> specification is support by others.
>
> +1 for freeze.
>
> regards,
>
> François
> On 18/11/2022 08:21, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> We discussed some time ago to drop batchee as an active subproject, wonder
> where we are now on this?
> Do we freeze it and document we don't maintain it anymore?
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github
>  | LinkedIn
>  | Book
> 
>
>
>

Re: [batchee] future?

[Mark Struberg via dev]

I still use batchee very much. So I'd keep it well alive. Also investing time 
on and on. 

Is there anything which is required to do?

LieGrue,
strub


> Am 18.11.2022 um 09:50 schrieb Francois Papon :
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I don't have insights about how BatchEE is used today and how the jbatch 
> specification is support by others.
> 
> +1 for freeze.
> 
> regards,
> 
> François
> 
> On 18/11/2022 08:21, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> 
>> We discussed some time ago to drop batchee as an active subproject, wonder 
>> where we are now on this?
>> Do we freeze it and document we don't maintain it anymore?
>> 
>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> @rmannibucau  |  Blog 
>>  | Old Blog 
>>  | Github 
>>  | LinkedIn 
>>  | Book 
>> 

Re: [batchee] future?

[Francois Papon]

Hi,

I don't have insights about how BatchEE is used today and how the jbatch 
specification is support by others.


+1 for freeze.

regards,

François

On 18/11/2022 08:21, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:

Hi all,

We discussed some time ago to drop batchee as an active subproject, 
wonder where we are now on this?

Do we freeze it and document we don't maintain it anymore?

Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau  | Blog 
 | Old Blog 
 | Github 
 | LinkedIn 
 | Book