Re: Site NG on github

[Romain Manni-Bucau]

Oh

So it is not a tool but a process. I see. Sounds very tempting to be honest
bit also think we should wait "after summer" to not change all at once.

What do you think?

Le 5 juil. 2017 02:21, "John D. Ament"  a écrit :

> Romain,
>
> For the site generation, if you want to switch to gitwcsub (and dump the
> SVN repo) its simply a matter of having a job (buildbot or jenkins) that
> will build the commit and push the result to a special branch (most are
> using asf-site).  Since you're already using mvn to generate the site, I
> think all you'd have to do is specify the new repo + branch name.
>
> John
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 12:20 PM Romain Manni-Bucau 
> wrote:
>
> > Ok submitted
> > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/tomee-tomee-site-generator.git,
> >
> > @John: do you have more details about gitwcsub, didnt find much except it
> > is the git replacement of svnpubsub? idea would be to sync a generated
> > folder with the remote "content" repo. Very worse case I can add it to
> our
> > generator with a java svn or git client, shouldnt take the night ;)
> >
> >
> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > @rmannibucau  |  Blog
> >  | Old Blog
> >  | Github <
> > https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> > LinkedIn  | JavaEE Factory
> > 
> >
> > 2017-07-04 17:20 GMT+02:00 John D. Ament :
> >
> > > Would be better to request a git repo via https://reporeq.apache.org/
> if
> > > you want a repository.  You may also want to consider using gitwcsub
> > > instead of svnpubsub for the actual generated site.
> > >
> > > John
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 9:15 AM Romain Manni-Bucau <
> rmannibu...@gmail.com
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Ok, let say if there is no -1 tonight I'll update the ticket to ask
> it
> > -
> > > it
> > > > doesnt hurt worse case so dont think we need to wait much more, in
> > > > particular if we want to work on the website now. Let me know if it
> is
> > a
> > > > concern at any level.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > @rmannibucau  |  Blog
> > > >  | Old Blog
> > > >  | Github <
> > > > https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> > > > LinkedIn  | JavaEE Factory
> > > > 
> > > >
> > > > 2017-07-04 15:04 GMT+02:00 Jonathan Gallimore <
> > > > jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com>
> > > > :
> > > >
> > > > > As in +1 for moving the project :-)
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 2:03 PM, Jonathan Gallimore <
> > > > > jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > +1
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 2:02 PM, Ivan Junckes Filho <
> > > > > ivanjunc...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> I think last time I checked github for the website was not up to
> > > date.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 10:00 AM, Daniel Cunha <
> > > daniels...@apache.org>
> > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> > Well, TomEE already moved to git, you don't need to use SVN.
> > > > > >> > PR integration already works fine, I saw that with last
> > > Jean-Louis's
> > > > > >> merge.
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > But yes, will be awesome to have it, we can use it like a
> stage
> > > and
> > > > > the
> > > > > >> > process to deploy in prod will be identical.
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > +1 for that.
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 9:56 AM, Ivan Junckes Filho <
> > > > > >> ivanjunc...@gmail.com>
> > > > > >> > wrote:
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > > This would be great, way better than doing svn patches.
> > > > > >> > >
> > > > > >> > > +1
> > > > > >> > >
> > > > > >> > > On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 9:54 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > > > > >> > rmannibu...@gmail.com>
> > > > > >> > > wrote:
> > > > > >> > >
> > > > > >> > > > Hi guys,
> > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > >> > > > I asked INFRA to proxy our new website project on github
> but
> > > it
> > > > > >> looks
> > > > > >> > > hard,
> > > > > >> > > > they propose us to move the project to another git repo.
> > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > >> > > > Anyone against it?
> > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > >> > > > For reference here is the ticket:
> > > > > >> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-14249
> > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > >> > > > Concretely we would get a git-asf/site-tomee-ng.git (or
> > > > > equivalent)
> > > > > >> and
> > > > > >> > > > have a github proxy.
> > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > >> > > > In term of deployment it would still be the same, ie we
> copy
> > > the
> > > > > >> output
> > > > > >> > > to
> > > > > >> > > > content/ of the cms subversion repo or we wire pubsub
> maven
> > > > > plugin.
> > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > >> > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > > >> > > > @rmannib

Re: [Discuss] Review-than-commit 3 month trial

[Gurkan Erdogdu]

Hi MarkThis is only for fixing the appeared (very important) problem in the 
community. So, I don't see what will happen to the project in 3 months period 
with RTC process? So, at least 3 months, every commit will be approved by the 
community via consensus. After that, we can safely return back to the normal 
process.

Thanks.Gurkan
On Wednesday, July 5, 2017, 1:15:31 AM GMT+3, Mark Struberg 
 wrote:

RTC in my experience _only_ works on release branches, but is a total community 
killer on the mainstream branch (master, dev, whatever you call it). 

We usually don't have so many concurrent commits on the same topic. There was 
recently an exceptional case and it got resolved.
Thus -1

Of course discussions might be done first. But not via PR but via mail.
Usually the devs have a good feeling about what is sensible and what not. 
For some deep change one usually sends a patch first for review. That is 
nothing we need to enforce - every good programmer will do just that!
Otoh there are 99.99% of stuff which you just get done and commit it. And if 
there is something fishy, then it get's caught via the commit log mails anyway.

LieGrue,
strub


> Am 03.07.2017 um 10:05 schrieb Jonathan Gallimore 
> :
> 
> On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 2:04 AM, David Blevins 
> wrote:
> 
>> There’s a discussion on the private list on this topic, but given the
>> recent thread I think it makes sense to move that here.
>> 
>> The vote would be only on this question:
>> 
>>  - Is RTC worth trying for 3 months? (+1,+/-0,-1)
>> 
>> I’ve seen some voices in favor, but do not want to propose a vote
>> without a heads-up.  Specifically, even if many people like the idea
>> we should talk about how we want to do it.
>> 
>> # Review-than-commit
>> 
>> For those that do not know, Review-than-commit is essentially what
>> Github Pull Requests are.  Prior to github, Apache describes them as:
>> 
>> - Commit policy which requires that all changes receive consensus
>>  approval in order to be committed.
>> 
>> I think we’ve seen evidence that:
>> 
>> - Slowing ourselves down can be a good thing.
>> 
>> - Moving ahead after discussion is a good thing.  Discussion should
>>  precede even the first commit.
>> 
>> - More eyes and talk around commits can help documentation efforts.
>> 
>> - As 3 +1s are required, a one-to-one conversation with no one else
>>  included is naturally discouraged.
>> 
>> # Trial basis
>> 
>> My thought is to go RTC for 3 months as a trial.  After 3 months, no
>> action means we revert back to our present CTR.  A new vote would be
>> required to continue RTC in any form, as-was or modified.
>> 
> 
> Unless its obviously unanimous that everyone dislikes RTC at the end of 3
> months, I'd suggest we call a vote to decide how to proceed. Not quite sure
> how that fits into +1/0/-1 however, so may be it should be a 3 month trial,
> followed by 2 weeks for review and discussion (during which we'd still be
> RTC) and then a vote?
> 
> 
>> 
>> The trial-basis is to acknowledge that we are voting on a guess of
>> potential benefits.  This allows us to "try before we buy" and the
>> vote really comes down to if we want to try.  We need not make a
>> decision based on other people's experience and have a means to gain
>> our own experience with a built-in escape clause that triggers lazily.
>> 
>> RTC may sound like a good idea, but our implemention of it may be bad
>> in practise.  It may sound like a bad idea, but we may discover
>> positives we hadn't anticipated.  We don't currently know.
>> 
>> # How would we do it?
>> 
>> Some things that would be good to discuss:
>> 
>>  - How could we use github pull requests?  Other communities do use
>>    them and I suspect there are options we have not explored.
>> 
> 
> I'd be in favour of that, as that process seems to be very well known.
> 
> 
>> 
>>  - Should all reviews be on the dev list? With Github PRs comments
>>    and JIRA comments, there needs to be a source of truth.
>> 
> 
> I think both the discussion and review should happen on the dev list.
> GH/JIRA comments are fine in themselves, but there may be (should be)
> discussion on dev@ before a PR is opened, so having all that discussion in
> one place is important for me. Even if GH comments prove popular, its not
> hard to copy/paste it to dev@ with a link.
> 
> 
>> 
>>  - Should we fully document the process before we try so we can get
>>    the most value from a 3 month trial?
>> 
> 
> I'd be in favour of discussing and documenting.
> 
> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> David Blevins
>> http://twitter.com/dblevins
>> http://www.tomitribe.com

Re: Site NG on github

[John D. Ament]

Romain,

For the site generation, if you want to switch to gitwcsub (and dump the
SVN repo) its simply a matter of having a job (buildbot or jenkins) that
will build the commit and push the result to a special branch (most are
using asf-site).  Since you're already using mvn to generate the site, I
think all you'd have to do is specify the new repo + branch name.

John


On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 12:20 PM Romain Manni-Bucau 
wrote:

> Ok submitted
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/tomee-tomee-site-generator.git,
>
> @John: do you have more details about gitwcsub, didnt find much except it
> is the git replacement of svnpubsub? idea would be to sync a generated
> folder with the remote "content" repo. Very worse case I can add it to our
> generator with a java svn or git client, shouldnt take the night ;)
>
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github <
> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> LinkedIn  | JavaEE Factory
> 
>
> 2017-07-04 17:20 GMT+02:00 John D. Ament :
>
> > Would be better to request a git repo via https://reporeq.apache.org/ if
> > you want a repository.  You may also want to consider using gitwcsub
> > instead of svnpubsub for the actual generated site.
> >
> > John
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 9:15 AM Romain Manni-Bucau  >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Ok, let say if there is no -1 tonight I'll update the ticket to ask it
> -
> > it
> > > doesnt hurt worse case so dont think we need to wait much more, in
> > > particular if we want to work on the website now. Let me know if it is
> a
> > > concern at any level.
> > >
> > >
> > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > @rmannibucau  |  Blog
> > >  | Old Blog
> > >  | Github <
> > > https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> > > LinkedIn  | JavaEE Factory
> > > 
> > >
> > > 2017-07-04 15:04 GMT+02:00 Jonathan Gallimore <
> > > jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com>
> > > :
> > >
> > > > As in +1 for moving the project :-)
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 2:03 PM, Jonathan Gallimore <
> > > > jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > +1
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 2:02 PM, Ivan Junckes Filho <
> > > > ivanjunc...@gmail.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> I think last time I checked github for the website was not up to
> > date.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 10:00 AM, Daniel Cunha <
> > daniels...@apache.org>
> > > > >> wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> > Well, TomEE already moved to git, you don't need to use SVN.
> > > > >> > PR integration already works fine, I saw that with last
> > Jean-Louis's
> > > > >> merge.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > But yes, will be awesome to have it, we can use it like a stage
> > and
> > > > the
> > > > >> > process to deploy in prod will be identical.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > +1 for that.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 9:56 AM, Ivan Junckes Filho <
> > > > >> ivanjunc...@gmail.com>
> > > > >> > wrote:
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > > This would be great, way better than doing svn patches.
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > > +1
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > > On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 9:54 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > > > >> > rmannibu...@gmail.com>
> > > > >> > > wrote:
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > > > Hi guys,
> > > > >> > > >
> > > > >> > > > I asked INFRA to proxy our new website project on github but
> > it
> > > > >> looks
> > > > >> > > hard,
> > > > >> > > > they propose us to move the project to another git repo.
> > > > >> > > >
> > > > >> > > > Anyone against it?
> > > > >> > > >
> > > > >> > > > For reference here is the ticket:
> > > > >> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-14249
> > > > >> > > >
> > > > >> > > > Concretely we would get a git-asf/site-tomee-ng.git (or
> > > > equivalent)
> > > > >> and
> > > > >> > > > have a github proxy.
> > > > >> > > >
> > > > >> > > > In term of deployment it would still be the same, ie we copy
> > the
> > > > >> output
> > > > >> > > to
> > > > >> > > > content/ of the cms subversion repo or we wire pubsub maven
> > > > plugin.
> > > > >> > > >
> > > > >> > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > >> > > > @rmannibucau  |  Blog
> > > > >> > > >  | Old Blog
> > > > >> > > >  | Github <
> > > https://github.com/
> > > > >> > > > rmannibucau> |
> > > > >> > > > LinkedIn  | JavaEE
> > > > Factory
> > > > >> > > > 
> > > > >> > > >
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > --
> > > > >> > Daniel Cunha
> > > > >> > https://t

Re: [Discuss] Review-than-commit 3 month trial

[Mark Struberg]

RTC in my experience _only_ works on release branches, but is a total community 
killer on the mainstream branch (master, dev, whatever you call it). 

We usually don't have so many concurrent commits on the same topic. There was 
recently an exceptional case and it got resolved.
Thus -1

Of course discussions might be done first. But not via PR but via mail.
Usually the devs have a good feeling about what is sensible and what not. 
For some deep change one usually sends a patch first for review. That is 
nothing we need to enforce - every good programmer will do just that!
Otoh there are 99.99% of stuff which you just get done and commit it. And if 
there is something fishy, then it get's caught via the commit log mails anyway.

LieGrue,
strub


> Am 03.07.2017 um 10:05 schrieb Jonathan Gallimore 
> :
> 
> On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 2:04 AM, David Blevins 
> wrote:
> 
>> There’s a discussion on the private list on this topic, but given the
>> recent thread I think it makes sense to move that here.
>> 
>> The vote would be only on this question:
>> 
>>  - Is RTC worth trying for 3 months? (+1,+/-0,-1)
>> 
>> I’ve seen some voices in favor, but do not want to propose a vote
>> without a heads-up.  Specifically, even if many people like the idea
>> we should talk about how we want to do it.
>> 
>> # Review-than-commit
>> 
>> For those that do not know, Review-than-commit is essentially what
>> Github Pull Requests are.  Prior to github, Apache describes them as:
>> 
>> - Commit policy which requires that all changes receive consensus
>>   approval in order to be committed.
>> 
>> I think we’ve seen evidence that:
>> 
>> - Slowing ourselves down can be a good thing.
>> 
>> - Moving ahead after discussion is a good thing.  Discussion should
>>   precede even the first commit.
>> 
>> - More eyes and talk around commits can help documentation efforts.
>> 
>> - As 3 +1s are required, a one-to-one conversation with no one else
>>   included is naturally discouraged.
>> 
>> # Trial basis
>> 
>> My thought is to go RTC for 3 months as a trial.  After 3 months, no
>> action means we revert back to our present CTR.  A new vote would be
>> required to continue RTC in any form, as-was or modified.
>> 
> 
> Unless its obviously unanimous that everyone dislikes RTC at the end of 3
> months, I'd suggest we call a vote to decide how to proceed. Not quite sure
> how that fits into +1/0/-1 however, so may be it should be a 3 month trial,
> followed by 2 weeks for review and discussion (during which we'd still be
> RTC) and then a vote?
> 
> 
>> 
>> The trial-basis is to acknowledge that we are voting on a guess of
>> potential benefits.  This allows us to "try before we buy" and the
>> vote really comes down to if we want to try.  We need not make a
>> decision based on other people's experience and have a means to gain
>> our own experience with a built-in escape clause that triggers lazily.
>> 
>> RTC may sound like a good idea, but our implemention of it may be bad
>> in practise.  It may sound like a bad idea, but we may discover
>> positives we hadn't anticipated.  We don't currently know.
>> 
>> # How would we do it?
>> 
>> Some things that would be good to discuss:
>> 
>>  - How could we use github pull requests?  Other communities do use
>>them and I suspect there are options we have not explored.
>> 
> 
> I'd be in favour of that, as that process seems to be very well known.
> 
> 
>> 
>>  - Should all reviews be on the dev list? With Github PRs comments
>>and JIRA comments, there needs to be a source of truth.
>> 
> 
> I think both the discussion and review should happen on the dev list.
> GH/JIRA comments are fine in themselves, but there may be (should be)
> discussion on dev@ before a PR is opened, so having all that discussion in
> one place is important for me. Even if GH comments prove popular, its not
> hard to copy/paste it to dev@ with a link.
> 
> 
>> 
>>  - Should we fully document the process before we try so we can get
>>the most value from a 3 month trial?
>> 
> 
> I'd be in favour of discussing and documenting.
> 
> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> David Blevins
>> http://twitter.com/dblevins
>> http://www.tomitribe.com

Re: Site NG on github

[Romain Manni-Bucau]

should have all the needed content now,

mvn compile to generate the site
mvn pre-site to publish it on staging


Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau  |  Blog
 | Old Blog
 | Github  |
LinkedIn  | JavaEE Factory


2017-07-04 19:30 GMT+02:00 Romain Manni-Bucau :

> *typo: https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/tomee-site-generator.git
> is the right one
>
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github
>  | LinkedIn
>  | JavaEE Factory
> 
>
> 2017-07-04 18:33 GMT+02:00 Romain Manni-Bucau :
>
>> imported the generator in https://git-wip-us.apache.o
>> rg/repos/asf?p=tomee-tomee-site-generator.git, will push a warning in
>> the svn project for now and we can delete it later
>>
>>
>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>>  | Old Blog
>>  | Github
>>  | LinkedIn
>>  | JavaEE Factory
>> 
>>
>> 2017-07-04 18:20 GMT+02:00 Romain Manni-Bucau :
>>
>>> Ok submitted https://git-wip-us.apache.org/
>>> repos/asf/tomee-tomee-site-generator.git,
>>>
>>> @John: do you have more details about gitwcsub, didnt find much except
>>> it is the git replacement of svnpubsub? idea would be to sync a generated
>>> folder with the remote "content" repo. Very worse case I can add it to our
>>> generator with a java svn or git client, shouldnt take the night ;)
>>>
>>>
>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>>> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>>>  | Old Blog
>>>  | Github
>>>  | LinkedIn
>>>  | JavaEE Factory
>>> 
>>>
>>> 2017-07-04 17:20 GMT+02:00 John D. Ament :
>>>
 Would be better to request a git repo via https://reporeq.apache.org/
 if
 you want a repository.  You may also want to consider using gitwcsub
 instead of svnpubsub for the actual generated site.

 John

 On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 9:15 AM Romain Manni-Bucau <
 rmannibu...@gmail.com>
 wrote:

 > Ok, let say if there is no -1 tonight I'll update the ticket to ask
 it - it
 > doesnt hurt worse case so dont think we need to wait much more, in
 > particular if we want to work on the website now. Let me know if it
 is a
 > concern at any level.
 >
 >
 > Romain Manni-Bucau
 > @rmannibucau  |  Blog
 >  | Old Blog
 >  | Github <
 > https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
 > LinkedIn  | JavaEE Factory
 > 
 >
 > 2017-07-04 15:04 GMT+02:00 Jonathan Gallimore <
 > jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com>
 > :
 >
 > > As in +1 for moving the project :-)
 > >
 > > On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 2:03 PM, Jonathan Gallimore <
 > > jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> wrote:
 > >
 > > > +1
 > > >
 > > > On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 2:02 PM, Ivan Junckes Filho <
 > > ivanjunc...@gmail.com>
 > > > wrote:
 > > >
 > > >> I think last time I checked github for the website was not up to
 date.
 > > >>
 > > >> On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 10:00 AM, Daniel Cunha <
 daniels...@apache.org>
 > > >> wrote:
 > > >>
 > > >> > Well, TomEE already moved to git, you don't need to use SVN.
 > > >> > PR integration already works fine, I saw that with last
 Jean-Louis's
 > > >> merge.
 > > >> >
 > > >> > But yes, will be awesome to have it, we can use it like a
 stage and
 > > the
 > > >> > process to deploy in prod will be identical.
 > > >> >
 > > >> > +1 for that.
 > > >> >
 > > >> > On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 9:56 AM, Ivan Junckes Filho <
 > > >> ivanjunc...@gmail.com>
 > > >> > wrote:
 > > >> >
 > > >> > > This would be great, way better than doing svn patches.
 > > >> > >
 > > >> > > +1
 > > >> > >
 > > >> > > On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 9:54 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
 > > >> > rmannibu...@gmail.com>
 > > >> > > wrote:
 > > >> > >
 > > >> > > > Hi guys,
 > > >> > > >
 > > >> > > > I asked INFRA to proxy our new website project on github
 but it
 > > >> looks
 > > >> > > ha

Re: [Discuss] Review-than-commit 3 month trial

[Gurkan Erdogdu]

Hi David
Thanks for your positive comments and ideas.I think RTC is a very good advice 
to have at least 3 months for the health of the community. We can return back 
to normal process after this trial 

This is my +1 
Regards.Gurkan


On Monday, July 3, 2017, 4:11:38 AM GMT+3, David Blevins 
 wrote:

There’s a discussion on the private list on this topic, but given the
recent thread I think it makes sense to move that here.

The vote would be only on this question:

  - Is RTC worth trying for 3 months? (+1,+/-0,-1)

I’ve seen some voices in favor, but do not want to propose a vote
without a heads-up.  Specifically, even if many people like the idea
we should talk about how we want to do it.

# Review-than-commit

For those that do not know, Review-than-commit is essentially what
Github Pull Requests are.  Prior to github, Apache describes them as:

 - Commit policy which requires that all changes receive consensus
  approval in order to be committed.

I think we’ve seen evidence that:

 - Slowing ourselves down can be a good thing.

 - Moving ahead after discussion is a good thing.  Discussion should
  precede even the first commit.

 - More eyes and talk around commits can help documentation efforts.

 - As 3 +1s are required, a one-to-one conversation with no one else
  included is naturally discouraged.

# Trial basis

My thought is to go RTC for 3 months as a trial.  After 3 months, no
action means we revert back to our present CTR.  A new vote would be
required to continue RTC in any form, as-was or modified.

The trial-basis is to acknowledge that we are voting on a guess of
potential benefits.  This allows us to "try before we buy" and the
vote really comes down to if we want to try.  We need not make a
decision based on other people's experience and have a means to gain
our own experience with a built-in escape clause that triggers lazily.

RTC may sound like a good idea, but our implemention of it may be bad
in practise.  It may sound like a bad idea, but we may discover
positives we hadn't anticipated.  We don't currently know.

# How would we do it?

Some things that would be good to discuss:

  - How could we use github pull requests?  Other communities do use
    them and I suspect there are options we have not explored.

  - Should all reviews be on the dev list? With Github PRs comments
    and JIRA comments, there needs to be a source of truth.

  - Should we fully document the process before we try so we can get
    the most value from a 3 month trial?


-- 
David Blevins
http://twitter.com/dblevins
http://www.tomitribe.com

Re: Site NG on github

[Romain Manni-Bucau]

*typo: https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/tomee-site-generator.git is
the right one


Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau  |  Blog
 | Old Blog
 | Github  |
LinkedIn  | JavaEE Factory


2017-07-04 18:33 GMT+02:00 Romain Manni-Bucau :

> imported the generator in https://git-wip-us.apache.
> org/repos/asf?p=tomee-tomee-site-generator.git, will push a warning in
> the svn project for now and we can delete it later
>
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github
>  | LinkedIn
>  | JavaEE Factory
> 
>
> 2017-07-04 18:20 GMT+02:00 Romain Manni-Bucau :
>
>> Ok submitted https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/tomee-tomee-site-gen
>> erator.git,
>>
>> @John: do you have more details about gitwcsub, didnt find much except
>> it is the git replacement of svnpubsub? idea would be to sync a generated
>> folder with the remote "content" repo. Very worse case I can add it to our
>> generator with a java svn or git client, shouldnt take the night ;)
>>
>>
>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>>  | Old Blog
>>  | Github
>>  | LinkedIn
>>  | JavaEE Factory
>> 
>>
>> 2017-07-04 17:20 GMT+02:00 John D. Ament :
>>
>>> Would be better to request a git repo via https://reporeq.apache.org/ if
>>> you want a repository.  You may also want to consider using gitwcsub
>>> instead of svnpubsub for the actual generated site.
>>>
>>> John
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 9:15 AM Romain Manni-Bucau >> >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> > Ok, let say if there is no -1 tonight I'll update the ticket to ask it
>>> - it
>>> > doesnt hurt worse case so dont think we need to wait much more, in
>>> > particular if we want to work on the website now. Let me know if it is
>>> a
>>> > concern at any level.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Romain Manni-Bucau
>>> > @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>>> >  | Old Blog
>>> >  | Github <
>>> > https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
>>> > LinkedIn  | JavaEE Factory
>>> > 
>>> >
>>> > 2017-07-04 15:04 GMT+02:00 Jonathan Gallimore <
>>> > jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com>
>>> > :
>>> >
>>> > > As in +1 for moving the project :-)
>>> > >
>>> > > On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 2:03 PM, Jonathan Gallimore <
>>> > > jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > > > +1
>>> > > >
>>> > > > On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 2:02 PM, Ivan Junckes Filho <
>>> > > ivanjunc...@gmail.com>
>>> > > > wrote:
>>> > > >
>>> > > >> I think last time I checked github for the website was not up to
>>> date.
>>> > > >>
>>> > > >> On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 10:00 AM, Daniel Cunha <
>>> daniels...@apache.org>
>>> > > >> wrote:
>>> > > >>
>>> > > >> > Well, TomEE already moved to git, you don't need to use SVN.
>>> > > >> > PR integration already works fine, I saw that with last
>>> Jean-Louis's
>>> > > >> merge.
>>> > > >> >
>>> > > >> > But yes, will be awesome to have it, we can use it like a stage
>>> and
>>> > > the
>>> > > >> > process to deploy in prod will be identical.
>>> > > >> >
>>> > > >> > +1 for that.
>>> > > >> >
>>> > > >> > On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 9:56 AM, Ivan Junckes Filho <
>>> > > >> ivanjunc...@gmail.com>
>>> > > >> > wrote:
>>> > > >> >
>>> > > >> > > This would be great, way better than doing svn patches.
>>> > > >> > >
>>> > > >> > > +1
>>> > > >> > >
>>> > > >> > > On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 9:54 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>>> > > >> > rmannibu...@gmail.com>
>>> > > >> > > wrote:
>>> > > >> > >
>>> > > >> > > > Hi guys,
>>> > > >> > > >
>>> > > >> > > > I asked INFRA to proxy our new website project on github
>>> but it
>>> > > >> looks
>>> > > >> > > hard,
>>> > > >> > > > they propose us to move the project to another git repo.
>>> > > >> > > >
>>> > > >> > > > Anyone against it?
>>> > > >> > > >
>>> > > >> > > > For reference here is the ticket:
>>> > > >> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-14249
>>> > > >> > > >
>>> > > >> > > > Concretely we would get a git-asf/site-tomee-ng.git (or
>>> > > equivalent)
>>> > > >> and
>>> > > >> > > > have a github proxy.
>>> > > >> > > >
>>> > > >> > > > In term of deployment it would still be the same, ie we
>>> copy the
>>> > > >> output
>>> > > >> > > to
>>> > > >> > > > content/ of the cms subversion repo or we wire pubsub maven
>>>

Re: Site NG on github

[Romain Manni-Bucau]

imported the generator in
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=tomee-tomee-site-generator.git,
will push a warning in the svn project for now and we can delete it later


Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau  |  Blog
 | Old Blog
 | Github  |
LinkedIn  | JavaEE Factory


2017-07-04 18:20 GMT+02:00 Romain Manni-Bucau :

> Ok submitted https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/tomee-tomee-site-
> generator.git,
>
> @John: do you have more details about gitwcsub, didnt find much except it
> is the git replacement of svnpubsub? idea would be to sync a generated
> folder with the remote "content" repo. Very worse case I can add it to our
> generator with a java svn or git client, shouldnt take the night ;)
>
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github
>  | LinkedIn
>  | JavaEE Factory
> 
>
> 2017-07-04 17:20 GMT+02:00 John D. Ament :
>
>> Would be better to request a git repo via https://reporeq.apache.org/ if
>> you want a repository.  You may also want to consider using gitwcsub
>> instead of svnpubsub for the actual generated site.
>>
>> John
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 9:15 AM Romain Manni-Bucau 
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Ok, let say if there is no -1 tonight I'll update the ticket to ask it
>> - it
>> > doesnt hurt worse case so dont think we need to wait much more, in
>> > particular if we want to work on the website now. Let me know if it is a
>> > concern at any level.
>> >
>> >
>> > Romain Manni-Bucau
>> > @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>> >  | Old Blog
>> >  | Github <
>> > https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
>> > LinkedIn  | JavaEE Factory
>> > 
>> >
>> > 2017-07-04 15:04 GMT+02:00 Jonathan Gallimore <
>> > jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com>
>> > :
>> >
>> > > As in +1 for moving the project :-)
>> > >
>> > > On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 2:03 PM, Jonathan Gallimore <
>> > > jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > +1
>> > > >
>> > > > On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 2:02 PM, Ivan Junckes Filho <
>> > > ivanjunc...@gmail.com>
>> > > > wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > >> I think last time I checked github for the website was not up to
>> date.
>> > > >>
>> > > >> On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 10:00 AM, Daniel Cunha <
>> daniels...@apache.org>
>> > > >> wrote:
>> > > >>
>> > > >> > Well, TomEE already moved to git, you don't need to use SVN.
>> > > >> > PR integration already works fine, I saw that with last
>> Jean-Louis's
>> > > >> merge.
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > But yes, will be awesome to have it, we can use it like a stage
>> and
>> > > the
>> > > >> > process to deploy in prod will be identical.
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > +1 for that.
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 9:56 AM, Ivan Junckes Filho <
>> > > >> ivanjunc...@gmail.com>
>> > > >> > wrote:
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > > This would be great, way better than doing svn patches.
>> > > >> > >
>> > > >> > > +1
>> > > >> > >
>> > > >> > > On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 9:54 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> > > >> > rmannibu...@gmail.com>
>> > > >> > > wrote:
>> > > >> > >
>> > > >> > > > Hi guys,
>> > > >> > > >
>> > > >> > > > I asked INFRA to proxy our new website project on github but
>> it
>> > > >> looks
>> > > >> > > hard,
>> > > >> > > > they propose us to move the project to another git repo.
>> > > >> > > >
>> > > >> > > > Anyone against it?
>> > > >> > > >
>> > > >> > > > For reference here is the ticket:
>> > > >> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-14249
>> > > >> > > >
>> > > >> > > > Concretely we would get a git-asf/site-tomee-ng.git (or
>> > > equivalent)
>> > > >> and
>> > > >> > > > have a github proxy.
>> > > >> > > >
>> > > >> > > > In term of deployment it would still be the same, ie we copy
>> the
>> > > >> output
>> > > >> > > to
>> > > >> > > > content/ of the cms subversion repo or we wire pubsub maven
>> > > plugin.
>> > > >> > > >
>> > > >> > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
>> > > >> > > > @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>> > > >> > > >  | Old Blog
>> > > >> > > >  | Github <
>> > https://github.com/
>> > > >> > > > rmannibucau> |
>> > > >> > > > LinkedIn  | JavaEE
>> > > Factory
>> > > >> > > > 
>> > > >> > > >
>> > > >> > >
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > --
>> > > >> > Daniel Cunha
>> > > >> > https://twitter.

Re: Site NG on github

[Romain Manni-Bucau]

Ok submitted
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/tomee-tomee-site-generator.git,

@John: do you have more details about gitwcsub, didnt find much except it
is the git replacement of svnpubsub? idea would be to sync a generated
folder with the remote "content" repo. Very worse case I can add it to our
generator with a java svn or git client, shouldnt take the night ;)


Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau  |  Blog
 | Old Blog
 | Github  |
LinkedIn  | JavaEE Factory


2017-07-04 17:20 GMT+02:00 John D. Ament :

> Would be better to request a git repo via https://reporeq.apache.org/ if
> you want a repository.  You may also want to consider using gitwcsub
> instead of svnpubsub for the actual generated site.
>
> John
>
> On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 9:15 AM Romain Manni-Bucau 
> wrote:
>
> > Ok, let say if there is no -1 tonight I'll update the ticket to ask it -
> it
> > doesnt hurt worse case so dont think we need to wait much more, in
> > particular if we want to work on the website now. Let me know if it is a
> > concern at any level.
> >
> >
> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > @rmannibucau  |  Blog
> >  | Old Blog
> >  | Github <
> > https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> > LinkedIn  | JavaEE Factory
> > 
> >
> > 2017-07-04 15:04 GMT+02:00 Jonathan Gallimore <
> > jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com>
> > :
> >
> > > As in +1 for moving the project :-)
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 2:03 PM, Jonathan Gallimore <
> > > jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > +1
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 2:02 PM, Ivan Junckes Filho <
> > > ivanjunc...@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> I think last time I checked github for the website was not up to
> date.
> > > >>
> > > >> On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 10:00 AM, Daniel Cunha <
> daniels...@apache.org>
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> > Well, TomEE already moved to git, you don't need to use SVN.
> > > >> > PR integration already works fine, I saw that with last
> Jean-Louis's
> > > >> merge.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > But yes, will be awesome to have it, we can use it like a stage
> and
> > > the
> > > >> > process to deploy in prod will be identical.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > +1 for that.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 9:56 AM, Ivan Junckes Filho <
> > > >> ivanjunc...@gmail.com>
> > > >> > wrote:
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > This would be great, way better than doing svn patches.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > +1
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 9:54 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > > >> > rmannibu...@gmail.com>
> > > >> > > wrote:
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > > Hi guys,
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > I asked INFRA to proxy our new website project on github but
> it
> > > >> looks
> > > >> > > hard,
> > > >> > > > they propose us to move the project to another git repo.
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > Anyone against it?
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > For reference here is the ticket:
> > > >> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-14249
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > Concretely we would get a git-asf/site-tomee-ng.git (or
> > > equivalent)
> > > >> and
> > > >> > > > have a github proxy.
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > In term of deployment it would still be the same, ie we copy
> the
> > > >> output
> > > >> > > to
> > > >> > > > content/ of the cms subversion repo or we wire pubsub maven
> > > plugin.
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > >> > > > @rmannibucau  |  Blog
> > > >> > > >  | Old Blog
> > > >> > > >  | Github <
> > https://github.com/
> > > >> > > > rmannibucau> |
> > > >> > > > LinkedIn  | JavaEE
> > > Factory
> > > >> > > > 
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> > --
> > > >> > Daniel Cunha
> > > >> > https://twitter.com/dvlc_
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: Site NG on github

[John D. Ament]

Would be better to request a git repo via https://reporeq.apache.org/ if
you want a repository.  You may also want to consider using gitwcsub
instead of svnpubsub for the actual generated site.

John

On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 9:15 AM Romain Manni-Bucau 
wrote:

> Ok, let say if there is no -1 tonight I'll update the ticket to ask it - it
> doesnt hurt worse case so dont think we need to wait much more, in
> particular if we want to work on the website now. Let me know if it is a
> concern at any level.
>
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github <
> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> LinkedIn  | JavaEE Factory
> 
>
> 2017-07-04 15:04 GMT+02:00 Jonathan Gallimore <
> jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com>
> :
>
> > As in +1 for moving the project :-)
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 2:03 PM, Jonathan Gallimore <
> > jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > +1
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 2:02 PM, Ivan Junckes Filho <
> > ivanjunc...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> I think last time I checked github for the website was not up to date.
> > >>
> > >> On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 10:00 AM, Daniel Cunha 
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > Well, TomEE already moved to git, you don't need to use SVN.
> > >> > PR integration already works fine, I saw that with last Jean-Louis's
> > >> merge.
> > >> >
> > >> > But yes, will be awesome to have it, we can use it like a stage and
> > the
> > >> > process to deploy in prod will be identical.
> > >> >
> > >> > +1 for that.
> > >> >
> > >> > On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 9:56 AM, Ivan Junckes Filho <
> > >> ivanjunc...@gmail.com>
> > >> > wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > > This would be great, way better than doing svn patches.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > +1
> > >> > >
> > >> > > On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 9:54 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > >> > rmannibu...@gmail.com>
> > >> > > wrote:
> > >> > >
> > >> > > > Hi guys,
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > I asked INFRA to proxy our new website project on github but it
> > >> looks
> > >> > > hard,
> > >> > > > they propose us to move the project to another git repo.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > Anyone against it?
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > For reference here is the ticket:
> > >> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-14249
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > Concretely we would get a git-asf/site-tomee-ng.git (or
> > equivalent)
> > >> and
> > >> > > > have a github proxy.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > In term of deployment it would still be the same, ie we copy the
> > >> output
> > >> > > to
> > >> > > > content/ of the cms subversion repo or we wire pubsub maven
> > plugin.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > >> > > > @rmannibucau  |  Blog
> > >> > > >  | Old Blog
> > >> > > >  | Github <
> https://github.com/
> > >> > > > rmannibucau> |
> > >> > > > LinkedIn  | JavaEE
> > Factory
> > >> > > > 
> > >> > > >
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > --
> > >> > Daniel Cunha
> > >> > https://twitter.com/dvlc_
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: Site NG on github

[Romain Manni-Bucau]

Ok, let say if there is no -1 tonight I'll update the ticket to ask it - it
doesnt hurt worse case so dont think we need to wait much more, in
particular if we want to work on the website now. Let me know if it is a
concern at any level.


Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau  |  Blog
 | Old Blog
 | Github  |
LinkedIn  | JavaEE Factory


2017-07-04 15:04 GMT+02:00 Jonathan Gallimore 
:

> As in +1 for moving the project :-)
>
> On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 2:03 PM, Jonathan Gallimore <
> jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 2:02 PM, Ivan Junckes Filho <
> ivanjunc...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> I think last time I checked github for the website was not up to date.
> >>
> >> On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 10:00 AM, Daniel Cunha 
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Well, TomEE already moved to git, you don't need to use SVN.
> >> > PR integration already works fine, I saw that with last Jean-Louis's
> >> merge.
> >> >
> >> > But yes, will be awesome to have it, we can use it like a stage and
> the
> >> > process to deploy in prod will be identical.
> >> >
> >> > +1 for that.
> >> >
> >> > On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 9:56 AM, Ivan Junckes Filho <
> >> ivanjunc...@gmail.com>
> >> > wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > This would be great, way better than doing svn patches.
> >> > >
> >> > > +1
> >> > >
> >> > > On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 9:54 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> >> > rmannibu...@gmail.com>
> >> > > wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > > Hi guys,
> >> > > >
> >> > > > I asked INFRA to proxy our new website project on github but it
> >> looks
> >> > > hard,
> >> > > > they propose us to move the project to another git repo.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Anyone against it?
> >> > > >
> >> > > > For reference here is the ticket:
> >> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-14249
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Concretely we would get a git-asf/site-tomee-ng.git (or
> equivalent)
> >> and
> >> > > > have a github proxy.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > In term of deployment it would still be the same, ie we copy the
> >> output
> >> > > to
> >> > > > content/ of the cms subversion repo or we wire pubsub maven
> plugin.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> > > > @rmannibucau  |  Blog
> >> > > >  | Old Blog
> >> > > >  | Github  >> > > > rmannibucau> |
> >> > > > LinkedIn  | JavaEE
> Factory
> >> > > > 
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Daniel Cunha
> >> > https://twitter.com/dvlc_
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
>

Re: Site NG on github

[Jonathan Gallimore]

+1

On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 2:02 PM, Ivan Junckes Filho 
wrote:

> I think last time I checked github for the website was not up to date.
>
> On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 10:00 AM, Daniel Cunha 
> wrote:
>
> > Well, TomEE already moved to git, you don't need to use SVN.
> > PR integration already works fine, I saw that with last Jean-Louis's
> merge.
> >
> > But yes, will be awesome to have it, we can use it like a stage and the
> > process to deploy in prod will be identical.
> >
> > +1 for that.
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 9:56 AM, Ivan Junckes Filho <
> ivanjunc...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > This would be great, way better than doing svn patches.
> > >
> > > +1
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 9:54 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > rmannibu...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi guys,
> > > >
> > > > I asked INFRA to proxy our new website project on github but it looks
> > > hard,
> > > > they propose us to move the project to another git repo.
> > > >
> > > > Anyone against it?
> > > >
> > > > For reference here is the ticket:
> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-14249
> > > >
> > > > Concretely we would get a git-asf/site-tomee-ng.git (or equivalent)
> and
> > > > have a github proxy.
> > > >
> > > > In term of deployment it would still be the same, ie we copy the
> output
> > > to
> > > > content/ of the cms subversion repo or we wire pubsub maven plugin.
> > > >
> > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > @rmannibucau  |  Blog
> > > >  | Old Blog
> > > >  | Github  > > > rmannibucau> |
> > > > LinkedIn  | JavaEE Factory
> > > > 
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Daniel Cunha
> > https://twitter.com/dvlc_
> >
>

Re: Site NG on github

[Jonathan Gallimore]

As in +1 for moving the project :-)

On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 2:03 PM, Jonathan Gallimore <
jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> wrote:

> +1
>
> On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 2:02 PM, Ivan Junckes Filho 
> wrote:
>
>> I think last time I checked github for the website was not up to date.
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 10:00 AM, Daniel Cunha 
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Well, TomEE already moved to git, you don't need to use SVN.
>> > PR integration already works fine, I saw that with last Jean-Louis's
>> merge.
>> >
>> > But yes, will be awesome to have it, we can use it like a stage and the
>> > process to deploy in prod will be identical.
>> >
>> > +1 for that.
>> >
>> > On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 9:56 AM, Ivan Junckes Filho <
>> ivanjunc...@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > This would be great, way better than doing svn patches.
>> > >
>> > > +1
>> > >
>> > > On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 9:54 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> > rmannibu...@gmail.com>
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > Hi guys,
>> > > >
>> > > > I asked INFRA to proxy our new website project on github but it
>> looks
>> > > hard,
>> > > > they propose us to move the project to another git repo.
>> > > >
>> > > > Anyone against it?
>> > > >
>> > > > For reference here is the ticket:
>> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-14249
>> > > >
>> > > > Concretely we would get a git-asf/site-tomee-ng.git (or equivalent)
>> and
>> > > > have a github proxy.
>> > > >
>> > > > In term of deployment it would still be the same, ie we copy the
>> output
>> > > to
>> > > > content/ of the cms subversion repo or we wire pubsub maven plugin.
>> > > >
>> > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
>> > > > @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>> > > >  | Old Blog
>> > > >  | Github > > > > rmannibucau> |
>> > > > LinkedIn  | JavaEE Factory
>> > > > 
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Daniel Cunha
>> > https://twitter.com/dvlc_
>> >
>>
>
>

Re: Site NG on github

[Ivan Junckes Filho]

I think last time I checked github for the website was not up to date.

On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 10:00 AM, Daniel Cunha  wrote:

> Well, TomEE already moved to git, you don't need to use SVN.
> PR integration already works fine, I saw that with last Jean-Louis's merge.
>
> But yes, will be awesome to have it, we can use it like a stage and the
> process to deploy in prod will be identical.
>
> +1 for that.
>
> On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 9:56 AM, Ivan Junckes Filho 
> wrote:
>
> > This would be great, way better than doing svn patches.
> >
> > +1
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 9:54 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> rmannibu...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi guys,
> > >
> > > I asked INFRA to proxy our new website project on github but it looks
> > hard,
> > > they propose us to move the project to another git repo.
> > >
> > > Anyone against it?
> > >
> > > For reference here is the ticket:
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-14249
> > >
> > > Concretely we would get a git-asf/site-tomee-ng.git (or equivalent) and
> > > have a github proxy.
> > >
> > > In term of deployment it would still be the same, ie we copy the output
> > to
> > > content/ of the cms subversion repo or we wire pubsub maven plugin.
> > >
> > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > @rmannibucau  |  Blog
> > >  | Old Blog
> > >  | Github  > > rmannibucau> |
> > > LinkedIn  | JavaEE Factory
> > > 
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Daniel Cunha
> https://twitter.com/dvlc_
>

Re: Site NG on github

[Daniel Cunha]

Well, TomEE already moved to git, you don't need to use SVN.
PR integration already works fine, I saw that with last Jean-Louis's merge.

But yes, will be awesome to have it, we can use it like a stage and the
process to deploy in prod will be identical.

+1 for that.

On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 9:56 AM, Ivan Junckes Filho 
wrote:

> This would be great, way better than doing svn patches.
>
> +1
>
> On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 9:54 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi guys,
> >
> > I asked INFRA to proxy our new website project on github but it looks
> hard,
> > they propose us to move the project to another git repo.
> >
> > Anyone against it?
> >
> > For reference here is the ticket:
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-14249
> >
> > Concretely we would get a git-asf/site-tomee-ng.git (or equivalent) and
> > have a github proxy.
> >
> > In term of deployment it would still be the same, ie we copy the output
> to
> > content/ of the cms subversion repo or we wire pubsub maven plugin.
> >
> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > @rmannibucau  |  Blog
> >  | Old Blog
> >  | Github  > rmannibucau> |
> > LinkedIn  | JavaEE Factory
> > 
> >
>



-- 
Daniel Cunha
https://twitter.com/dvlc_

Re: Site NG on github

[Ivan Junckes Filho]

This would be great, way better than doing svn patches.

+1

On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 9:54 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau 
wrote:

> Hi guys,
>
> I asked INFRA to proxy our new website project on github but it looks hard,
> they propose us to move the project to another git repo.
>
> Anyone against it?
>
> For reference here is the ticket:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-14249
>
> Concretely we would get a git-asf/site-tomee-ng.git (or equivalent) and
> have a github proxy.
>
> In term of deployment it would still be the same, ie we copy the output to
> content/ of the cms subversion repo or we wire pubsub maven plugin.
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github  rmannibucau> |
> LinkedIn  | JavaEE Factory
> 
>

Site NG on github

[Romain Manni-Bucau]

Hi guys,

I asked INFRA to proxy our new website project on github but it looks hard,
they propose us to move the project to another git repo.

Anyone against it?

For reference here is the ticket:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-14249

Concretely we would get a git-asf/site-tomee-ng.git (or equivalent) and
have a github proxy.

In term of deployment it would still be the same, ie we copy the output to
content/ of the cms subversion repo or we wire pubsub maven plugin.

Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau  |  Blog
 | Old Blog
 | Github  |
LinkedIn  | JavaEE Factory

Re: MDB JMX Control

[Romain Manni-Bucau]

will open a new thread about the github integration of the site "Site NG on
github"


Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau  |  Blog
 | Old Blog
 | Github  |
LinkedIn  | JavaEE Factory


2017-07-04 14:51 GMT+02:00 Daniel Cunha :

> Which will be awesome if we discuss that here.
> So, others contributors can put their point of view as well.
>
> If we have a Pull Request for that, we can open a discussion on it. With
> patch file, this is more complicated for some others see the changes. IMHO.
> (talking about website/documentation)
>
> On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 9:38 AM, Ivan Junckes Filho 
> wrote:
>
> > Btw, Andy is working with me to put it live so everyone can review. Let's
> > do this before applying it.
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 9:25 AM, Ivan Junckes Filho <
> ivanjunc...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I would love that Romain :)
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 9:00 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > rmannibu...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> @Ivan: if Andy is ok and if it helps for you I think he can apply your
> > >> last
> > >> patch which looks good and we can make it live to iterate from it from
> > now
> > >> on.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> > >> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
> > >>  | Old Blog
> > >>  | Github <
> > >> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> > >> LinkedIn  | JavaEE Factory
> > >> 
> > >>
> > >> 2017-07-04 13:57 GMT+02:00 Ivan Junckes Filho  >:
> > >>
> > >> > Hello Jon, I would love to help with the documentation for this new
> > >> > feature. I have the website setup in my local so it is not hard to
> > write
> > >> > it.
> > >> >
> > >> > I will just need some time as too many things are going on at the
> > >> moment.
> > >> >
> > >> > Ivan
> > >> >
> > >> > On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 8:46 AM, Jonathan Gallimore <
> > >> > jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > > This has been open for a while. I will push the docs for it, but
> in
> > >> the
> > >> > > meantime, please let me know if there are any blockers to merge.
> > I'll
> > >> > merge
> > >> > > it in the next day or so unless there is specific blocking
> feedback.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Many thanks.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Jon
> > >> > >
> > >> > > On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 2:48 PM, Jonathan Gallimore <
> > >> > > jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> > >
> > >> > > > Thanks for the feedback Jonathan! Let me see if I can make some
> > >> > > > improvements there. Point taken on the example - it shouldn't be
> > an
> > >> > issue
> > >> > > > to add something like that. I can do that, or if someone out
> there
> > >> is
> > >> > > > interested in contributing, let me know and I'll hook you up so
> > you
> > >> can
> > >> > > add
> > >> > > > it.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > I'd love to hear from a few more people. I'm conscious that MDBs
> > and
> > >> > > > connectors might not be a very much understood part of Java EE.
> So
> > >> even
> > >> > > if
> > >> > > > you have no idea what this thread is about, or you're curious
> > about
> > >> how
> > >> > > to
> > >> > > > do certain things with JMS with TomEE, like switch JMS provider,
> > or
> > >> add
> > >> > > > other connectors, or even build your own connector, please do
> ask
> > a
> > >> > > > question either here or on a new thread if that's more suitable
> > and
> > >> > I'll
> > >> > > > try and answer questions and crank out some documentation for
> > >> review.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > Jon
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 10:31 PM, exabrial12 <
> exabr...@gmail.com>
> > >> > wrote:
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >> +1 Looks good to me.
> > >> > > >>
> > >> > > >> As always, docs speak a million words. Something like
> > >> > > >> http://tomee.apache.org/examples-trunk/simple-mdb/README.html
> > >> would
> > >> > be
> > >> > > >> helpful!
> > >> > > >>
> > >> > > >> The most important part is to always document your decision
> > >> process,
> > >> > > >> through
> > >> > > >> logging, comments, or docs. The vast majority of the time, it's
> > not
> > >> > > >> obvious
> > >> > > >> through one's source code.
> > >> > > >>
> > >> > > >>
> > >> > > >>
> > >> > > >> --
> > >> > > >> View this message in context: http://tomee-openejb.979440.n4
> > >> > > >> .nabble.com/MDB-JMX-Control-tp4681962p4681994.html
> > >> > > >> Sent from the TomEE Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> > >> > > >>
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Daniel Cunha
> https://twitter.com/dvlc_
>

Re: MDB JMX Control

[Daniel Cunha]

Which will be awesome if we discuss that here.
So, others contributors can put their point of view as well.

If we have a Pull Request for that, we can open a discussion on it. With
patch file, this is more complicated for some others see the changes. IMHO.
(talking about website/documentation)

On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 9:38 AM, Ivan Junckes Filho 
wrote:

> Btw, Andy is working with me to put it live so everyone can review. Let's
> do this before applying it.
>
> On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 9:25 AM, Ivan Junckes Filho 
> wrote:
>
> > I would love that Romain :)
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 9:00 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> rmannibu...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> @Ivan: if Andy is ok and if it helps for you I think he can apply your
> >> last
> >> patch which looks good and we can make it live to iterate from it from
> now
> >> on.
> >>
> >>
> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
> >>  | Old Blog
> >>  | Github <
> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> >> LinkedIn  | JavaEE Factory
> >> 
> >>
> >> 2017-07-04 13:57 GMT+02:00 Ivan Junckes Filho :
> >>
> >> > Hello Jon, I would love to help with the documentation for this new
> >> > feature. I have the website setup in my local so it is not hard to
> write
> >> > it.
> >> >
> >> > I will just need some time as too many things are going on at the
> >> moment.
> >> >
> >> > Ivan
> >> >
> >> > On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 8:46 AM, Jonathan Gallimore <
> >> > jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > This has been open for a while. I will push the docs for it, but in
> >> the
> >> > > meantime, please let me know if there are any blockers to merge.
> I'll
> >> > merge
> >> > > it in the next day or so unless there is specific blocking feedback.
> >> > >
> >> > > Many thanks.
> >> > >
> >> > > Jon
> >> > >
> >> > > On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 2:48 PM, Jonathan Gallimore <
> >> > > jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > > Thanks for the feedback Jonathan! Let me see if I can make some
> >> > > > improvements there. Point taken on the example - it shouldn't be
> an
> >> > issue
> >> > > > to add something like that. I can do that, or if someone out there
> >> is
> >> > > > interested in contributing, let me know and I'll hook you up so
> you
> >> can
> >> > > add
> >> > > > it.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > I'd love to hear from a few more people. I'm conscious that MDBs
> and
> >> > > > connectors might not be a very much understood part of Java EE. So
> >> even
> >> > > if
> >> > > > you have no idea what this thread is about, or you're curious
> about
> >> how
> >> > > to
> >> > > > do certain things with JMS with TomEE, like switch JMS provider,
> or
> >> add
> >> > > > other connectors, or even build your own connector, please do ask
> a
> >> > > > question either here or on a new thread if that's more suitable
> and
> >> > I'll
> >> > > > try and answer questions and crank out some documentation for
> >> review.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Jon
> >> > > >
> >> > > > On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 10:31 PM, exabrial12 
> >> > wrote:
> >> > > >
> >> > > >> +1 Looks good to me.
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> As always, docs speak a million words. Something like
> >> > > >> http://tomee.apache.org/examples-trunk/simple-mdb/README.html
> >> would
> >> > be
> >> > > >> helpful!
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> The most important part is to always document your decision
> >> process,
> >> > > >> through
> >> > > >> logging, comments, or docs. The vast majority of the time, it's
> not
> >> > > >> obvious
> >> > > >> through one's source code.
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> --
> >> > > >> View this message in context: http://tomee-openejb.979440.n4
> >> > > >> .nabble.com/MDB-JMX-Control-tp4681962p4681994.html
> >> > > >> Sent from the TomEE Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
>



-- 
Daniel Cunha
https://twitter.com/dvlc_

Re: MDB JMX Control

[Ivan Junckes Filho]

Btw, Andy is working with me to put it live so everyone can review. Let's
do this before applying it.

On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 9:25 AM, Ivan Junckes Filho 
wrote:

> I would love that Romain :)
>
> On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 9:00 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau 
> wrote:
>
>> @Ivan: if Andy is ok and if it helps for you I think he can apply your
>> last
>> patch which looks good and we can make it live to iterate from it from now
>> on.
>>
>>
>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>>  | Old Blog
>>  | Github <
>> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
>> LinkedIn  | JavaEE Factory
>> 
>>
>> 2017-07-04 13:57 GMT+02:00 Ivan Junckes Filho :
>>
>> > Hello Jon, I would love to help with the documentation for this new
>> > feature. I have the website setup in my local so it is not hard to write
>> > it.
>> >
>> > I will just need some time as too many things are going on at the
>> moment.
>> >
>> > Ivan
>> >
>> > On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 8:46 AM, Jonathan Gallimore <
>> > jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > > This has been open for a while. I will push the docs for it, but in
>> the
>> > > meantime, please let me know if there are any blockers to merge. I'll
>> > merge
>> > > it in the next day or so unless there is specific blocking feedback.
>> > >
>> > > Many thanks.
>> > >
>> > > Jon
>> > >
>> > > On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 2:48 PM, Jonathan Gallimore <
>> > > jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > Thanks for the feedback Jonathan! Let me see if I can make some
>> > > > improvements there. Point taken on the example - it shouldn't be an
>> > issue
>> > > > to add something like that. I can do that, or if someone out there
>> is
>> > > > interested in contributing, let me know and I'll hook you up so you
>> can
>> > > add
>> > > > it.
>> > > >
>> > > > I'd love to hear from a few more people. I'm conscious that MDBs and
>> > > > connectors might not be a very much understood part of Java EE. So
>> even
>> > > if
>> > > > you have no idea what this thread is about, or you're curious about
>> how
>> > > to
>> > > > do certain things with JMS with TomEE, like switch JMS provider, or
>> add
>> > > > other connectors, or even build your own connector, please do ask a
>> > > > question either here or on a new thread if that's more suitable and
>> > I'll
>> > > > try and answer questions and crank out some documentation for
>> review.
>> > > >
>> > > > Jon
>> > > >
>> > > > On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 10:31 PM, exabrial12 
>> > wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > >> +1 Looks good to me.
>> > > >>
>> > > >> As always, docs speak a million words. Something like
>> > > >> http://tomee.apache.org/examples-trunk/simple-mdb/README.html
>> would
>> > be
>> > > >> helpful!
>> > > >>
>> > > >> The most important part is to always document your decision
>> process,
>> > > >> through
>> > > >> logging, comments, or docs. The vast majority of the time, it's not
>> > > >> obvious
>> > > >> through one's source code.
>> > > >>
>> > > >>
>> > > >>
>> > > >> --
>> > > >> View this message in context: http://tomee-openejb.979440.n4
>> > > >> .nabble.com/MDB-JMX-Control-tp4681962p4681994.html
>> > > >> Sent from the TomEE Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>> > > >>
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>>
>
>

Re: MDB JMX Control

[Ivan Junckes Filho]

I would love that Romain :)

On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 9:00 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau 
wrote:

> @Ivan: if Andy is ok and if it helps for you I think he can apply your last
> patch which looks good and we can make it live to iterate from it from now
> on.
>
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github  rmannibucau> |
> LinkedIn  | JavaEE Factory
> 
>
> 2017-07-04 13:57 GMT+02:00 Ivan Junckes Filho :
>
> > Hello Jon, I would love to help with the documentation for this new
> > feature. I have the website setup in my local so it is not hard to write
> > it.
> >
> > I will just need some time as too many things are going on at the moment.
> >
> > Ivan
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 8:46 AM, Jonathan Gallimore <
> > jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > This has been open for a while. I will push the docs for it, but in the
> > > meantime, please let me know if there are any blockers to merge. I'll
> > merge
> > > it in the next day or so unless there is specific blocking feedback.
> > >
> > > Many thanks.
> > >
> > > Jon
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 2:48 PM, Jonathan Gallimore <
> > > jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Thanks for the feedback Jonathan! Let me see if I can make some
> > > > improvements there. Point taken on the example - it shouldn't be an
> > issue
> > > > to add something like that. I can do that, or if someone out there is
> > > > interested in contributing, let me know and I'll hook you up so you
> can
> > > add
> > > > it.
> > > >
> > > > I'd love to hear from a few more people. I'm conscious that MDBs and
> > > > connectors might not be a very much understood part of Java EE. So
> even
> > > if
> > > > you have no idea what this thread is about, or you're curious about
> how
> > > to
> > > > do certain things with JMS with TomEE, like switch JMS provider, or
> add
> > > > other connectors, or even build your own connector, please do ask a
> > > > question either here or on a new thread if that's more suitable and
> > I'll
> > > > try and answer questions and crank out some documentation for review.
> > > >
> > > > Jon
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 10:31 PM, exabrial12 
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> +1 Looks good to me.
> > > >>
> > > >> As always, docs speak a million words. Something like
> > > >> http://tomee.apache.org/examples-trunk/simple-mdb/README.html would
> > be
> > > >> helpful!
> > > >>
> > > >> The most important part is to always document your decision process,
> > > >> through
> > > >> logging, comments, or docs. The vast majority of the time, it's not
> > > >> obvious
> > > >> through one's source code.
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> --
> > > >> View this message in context: http://tomee-openejb.979440.n4
> > > >> .nabble.com/MDB-JMX-Control-tp4681962p4681994.html
> > > >> Sent from the TomEE Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: MDB JMX Control

[Romain Manni-Bucau]

@Ivan: if Andy is ok and if it helps for you I think he can apply your last
patch which looks good and we can make it live to iterate from it from now
on.


Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau  |  Blog
 | Old Blog
 | Github  |
LinkedIn  | JavaEE Factory


2017-07-04 13:57 GMT+02:00 Ivan Junckes Filho :

> Hello Jon, I would love to help with the documentation for this new
> feature. I have the website setup in my local so it is not hard to write
> it.
>
> I will just need some time as too many things are going on at the moment.
>
> Ivan
>
> On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 8:46 AM, Jonathan Gallimore <
> jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > This has been open for a while. I will push the docs for it, but in the
> > meantime, please let me know if there are any blockers to merge. I'll
> merge
> > it in the next day or so unless there is specific blocking feedback.
> >
> > Many thanks.
> >
> > Jon
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 2:48 PM, Jonathan Gallimore <
> > jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Thanks for the feedback Jonathan! Let me see if I can make some
> > > improvements there. Point taken on the example - it shouldn't be an
> issue
> > > to add something like that. I can do that, or if someone out there is
> > > interested in contributing, let me know and I'll hook you up so you can
> > add
> > > it.
> > >
> > > I'd love to hear from a few more people. I'm conscious that MDBs and
> > > connectors might not be a very much understood part of Java EE. So even
> > if
> > > you have no idea what this thread is about, or you're curious about how
> > to
> > > do certain things with JMS with TomEE, like switch JMS provider, or add
> > > other connectors, or even build your own connector, please do ask a
> > > question either here or on a new thread if that's more suitable and
> I'll
> > > try and answer questions and crank out some documentation for review.
> > >
> > > Jon
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 10:31 PM, exabrial12 
> wrote:
> > >
> > >> +1 Looks good to me.
> > >>
> > >> As always, docs speak a million words. Something like
> > >> http://tomee.apache.org/examples-trunk/simple-mdb/README.html would
> be
> > >> helpful!
> > >>
> > >> The most important part is to always document your decision process,
> > >> through
> > >> logging, comments, or docs. The vast majority of the time, it's not
> > >> obvious
> > >> through one's source code.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> View this message in context: http://tomee-openejb.979440.n4
> > >> .nabble.com/MDB-JMX-Control-tp4681962p4681994.html
> > >> Sent from the TomEE Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: MDB JMX Control

[Ivan Junckes Filho]

Hello Jon, I would love to help with the documentation for this new
feature. I have the website setup in my local so it is not hard to write it.

I will just need some time as too many things are going on at the moment.

Ivan

On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 8:46 AM, Jonathan Gallimore <
jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> wrote:

> This has been open for a while. I will push the docs for it, but in the
> meantime, please let me know if there are any blockers to merge. I'll merge
> it in the next day or so unless there is specific blocking feedback.
>
> Many thanks.
>
> Jon
>
> On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 2:48 PM, Jonathan Gallimore <
> jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Thanks for the feedback Jonathan! Let me see if I can make some
> > improvements there. Point taken on the example - it shouldn't be an issue
> > to add something like that. I can do that, or if someone out there is
> > interested in contributing, let me know and I'll hook you up so you can
> add
> > it.
> >
> > I'd love to hear from a few more people. I'm conscious that MDBs and
> > connectors might not be a very much understood part of Java EE. So even
> if
> > you have no idea what this thread is about, or you're curious about how
> to
> > do certain things with JMS with TomEE, like switch JMS provider, or add
> > other connectors, or even build your own connector, please do ask a
> > question either here or on a new thread if that's more suitable and I'll
> > try and answer questions and crank out some documentation for review.
> >
> > Jon
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 10:31 PM, exabrial12  wrote:
> >
> >> +1 Looks good to me.
> >>
> >> As always, docs speak a million words. Something like
> >> http://tomee.apache.org/examples-trunk/simple-mdb/README.html would be
> >> helpful!
> >>
> >> The most important part is to always document your decision process,
> >> through
> >> logging, comments, or docs. The vast majority of the time, it's not
> >> obvious
> >> through one's source code.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> View this message in context: http://tomee-openejb.979440.n4
> >> .nabble.com/MDB-JMX-Control-tp4681962p4681994.html
> >> Sent from the TomEE Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> >>
> >
> >
>

Re: MDB JMX Control

[Jonathan Gallimore]

This has been open for a while. I will push the docs for it, but in the
meantime, please let me know if there are any blockers to merge. I'll merge
it in the next day or so unless there is specific blocking feedback.

Many thanks.

Jon

On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 2:48 PM, Jonathan Gallimore <
jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Thanks for the feedback Jonathan! Let me see if I can make some
> improvements there. Point taken on the example - it shouldn't be an issue
> to add something like that. I can do that, or if someone out there is
> interested in contributing, let me know and I'll hook you up so you can add
> it.
>
> I'd love to hear from a few more people. I'm conscious that MDBs and
> connectors might not be a very much understood part of Java EE. So even if
> you have no idea what this thread is about, or you're curious about how to
> do certain things with JMS with TomEE, like switch JMS provider, or add
> other connectors, or even build your own connector, please do ask a
> question either here or on a new thread if that's more suitable and I'll
> try and answer questions and crank out some documentation for review.
>
> Jon
>
> On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 10:31 PM, exabrial12  wrote:
>
>> +1 Looks good to me.
>>
>> As always, docs speak a million words. Something like
>> http://tomee.apache.org/examples-trunk/simple-mdb/README.html would be
>> helpful!
>>
>> The most important part is to always document your decision process,
>> through
>> logging, comments, or docs. The vast majority of the time, it's not
>> obvious
>> through one's source code.
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> View this message in context: http://tomee-openejb.979440.n4
>> .nabble.com/MDB-JMX-Control-tp4681962p4681994.html
>> Sent from the TomEE Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>
>

Re: TOMEE-2084 - PR Pending

[Daniel Cunha]

Thanks!

On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 4:50 AM, Jean-Louis Monteiro <
jlmonte...@tomitribe.com> wrote:

> Thanks Daniel. I merged it
>
> --
> Jean-Louis Monteiro
> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> http://www.tomitribe.com
>
> On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 11:52 PM, Daniel Cunha 
> wrote:
>
> > Thanks Jon for share the link. :)
> >
> > Daniel Cunha
> > https://twitter.com/dvlc_
> >
> > On Jul 3, 2017 5:04 PM, "Jonathan Gallimore" <
> jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com
> > >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Here's the link for everyone: https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/83
> > >
> > > Looks like a good catch, Daniel. Thanks for that.
> > >
> > > Jon
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 8:53 PM, Daniel Cunha 
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi devs,
> > > >
> > > > I sent a PR for TOMEE-2084.
> > > > Romain already put his eyes on it and approved.
> > > >
> > > > Let me know if all of you are agree with that.
> > > >
> > > > Thank you. []'s :)
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Daniel Cunha
> > > > https://twitter.com/dvlc_
> > > >
> > >
> >
>



-- 
Daniel Cunha
https://twitter.com/dvlc_

Re: AutoConfig - IllegalArgumentException: Comparison method violates its general contract!

[Svetlin Zarev]

Created TomEE-2085 and https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/84

What do you think ?

2017-07-04 10:41 GMT+03:00 Romain Manni-Bucau :

> +1, the indexOf was supposed to be done on getResourceIds(appResources,
> type, required) not the copy (which is sorted)
>
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github  rmannibucau> |
> LinkedIn  | JavaEE Factory
> 
>
> 2017-07-04 9:38 GMT+02:00 Svetlin Zarev :
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I found a nasty bug in AutoConfig:2077. The comparator does not work
> > correctly with java 8.
> > In older java versions (older than 8), Collections.sort() always creates
> an
> > array from the list content, while starting with java 8 -> it delegates
> to
> > the sort() method implemented in the concrete list implementation.  The
> > implementation of ArrayList, works directly on the inner array, which
> > violates the assumption of the current comparator that the arraylist'
> > sbacking array is not modified in real time.
> >
> > I'll create a jira bug shortly and attach a reproducible test case.
> >
> > Kind regards,
> > Svetlin
> >
>

Re: TOMEE-2084 - PR Pending

[Jean-Louis Monteiro]

Thanks Daniel. I merged it

--
Jean-Louis Monteiro
http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
http://www.tomitribe.com

On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 11:52 PM, Daniel Cunha  wrote:

> Thanks Jon for share the link. :)
>
> Daniel Cunha
> https://twitter.com/dvlc_
>
> On Jul 3, 2017 5:04 PM, "Jonathan Gallimore"  >
> wrote:
>
> > Here's the link for everyone: https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/83
> >
> > Looks like a good catch, Daniel. Thanks for that.
> >
> > Jon
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 8:53 PM, Daniel Cunha 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi devs,
> > >
> > > I sent a PR for TOMEE-2084.
> > > Romain already put his eyes on it and approved.
> > >
> > > Let me know if all of you are agree with that.
> > >
> > > Thank you. []'s :)
> > >
> > > --
> > > Daniel Cunha
> > > https://twitter.com/dvlc_
> > >
> >
>

Re: AutoConfig - IllegalArgumentException: Comparison method violates its general contract!

[Romain Manni-Bucau]

+1, the indexOf was supposed to be done on getResourceIds(appResources,
type, required) not the copy (which is sorted)


Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau  |  Blog
 | Old Blog
 | Github  |
LinkedIn  | JavaEE Factory


2017-07-04 9:38 GMT+02:00 Svetlin Zarev :

> Hi,
>
> I found a nasty bug in AutoConfig:2077. The comparator does not work
> correctly with java 8.
> In older java versions (older than 8), Collections.sort() always creates an
> array from the list content, while starting with java 8 -> it delegates to
> the sort() method implemented in the concrete list implementation.  The
> implementation of ArrayList, works directly on the inner array, which
> violates the assumption of the current comparator that the arraylist'
> sbacking array is not modified in real time.
>
> I'll create a jira bug shortly and attach a reproducible test case.
>
> Kind regards,
> Svetlin
>

AutoConfig - IllegalArgumentException: Comparison method violates its general contract!

[Svetlin Zarev]

Hi,

I found a nasty bug in AutoConfig:2077. The comparator does not work
correctly with java 8.
In older java versions (older than 8), Collections.sort() always creates an
array from the list content, while starting with java 8 -> it delegates to
the sort() method implemented in the concrete list implementation.  The
implementation of ArrayList, works directly on the inner array, which
violates the assumption of the current comparator that the arraylist'
sbacking array is not modified in real time.

I'll create a jira bug shortly and attach a reproducible test case.

Kind regards,
Svetlin