Re: [VOTE] Merge Pull Request 123 - MicroProfile JWT support
+1 to merge it here. On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 6:38 AM, Jonathan Gallimore < jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> wrote: > I'm +1 to merge this, and allow the discussion about its ultimate home to > continue. > > Jon > > On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 12:02 AM, David Blevins > wrote: > > > Jean-Louis has put a PR up for discussion for JWT Support in TomEE. > > > > - https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/123 > > > > There are 35 commits spanning 27 days of work. It's been reviewed by > Andy > > and Rudy. One a committer and one a contributor, which is great for us. > > > > There's an open question as to where the code should live in its final > > state: TomEE or Geronimo. This conversation doesn't seem conclusive > after > > 12 days. It's ok for us not to agree, but we should have more votes so > > there is a clear outcome and we are acting as a community to our best > > ability. > > > > Vote: Merge Pull Request 123? > > > > +1 Yes, let's do it > > +-0 Abstain > > -1 No, don't put this code in TomEE > > > > > > Out of respect for the conversation, this is not a vote of where the code > > will live in its final state. This is just a decision to merge or not. > It > > would give the users something they can try, which can be updated by a > > future PR if the code does eventually move. > > > > > > -David > > > > >
Re: What is this project?
yes very interesting. i didn't realise there was so much history behind it. i came from tomcat so never knew about geronimo. i heard the name all over the place of course On 22/03/2018 03:04, David Blevins wrote: On Mar 19, 2018, at 2:45 AM, Mark Struberg wrote: Let's face it TomEE is mostly an aggregator. A great one, I really love it - but still. [...] Folks, you have to stop thinking as TomEE as being the center of the world. I love TomEE and it's a great aggregator and a great community. Everyone is free to have a perspective on what this project is and it's ok for it not to be the same. It almost never is. It ebbs and it flows and that is natural. As long as we're clear when we say "TomEE is..." we are expressing our own opinions, we're ok. People tend to think of the project in terms of when they came in. Their "OpenEJB is x" or "TomEE is x" seems to reflect around the time they got commit. I've put together a timeline of how I've experienced the project. I think people should dream for more. It's the best part about open source and what got us even this far. If you look at this timeline you see all the growth periods are people deciding that this is where they wanted to work and they we're the most flexible on what that was. Even to the point of turning an EJB container into a Java EE platform. -- 1999-2001 Project is born as an EJB library. Not quite a full EJB implementation. It is envisioned as an EJB Container with the EJB Server part being implemented by a full app server. The vision was to strategically not implement the server part so true app servers would integrate the project as a library. Resources are abundant, people are everywhere. Many people on the project want to implement the server portion and make the project more than it is. Myself and Richard tell them no. Speaking for myself, I was a newbie idiot in this phase of the project. 2001-2003 Funding has dropped from the project, everyone from the original community but Daniel, Jacek and Alan have gone. I see it now as a full EJB implementation and perhaps a bit more. The Tomcat integration is born so Tomcat can have an EJB implementation. The embedded EJB container for testing is heavily pushed. The full remote protocol is created. The project is now bigger than its original scope, but only slightly. Generally, there are no resources and not many people around. 2003-2006 Geronimo is launched and the project is flooded with new people excited about Geronimo's future. OpenEJB 1.0 is abandoned for OpenEJB 2.0 which is a total rewrite of EJB on the Geronimo kernel and module system. Tomcat integration and embedded EJB concepts are trashed. I still see this as a project that can live on its own and be more and something I'd love to see grow in scope. Everyone on Geronimo, but me, sees it as a library for Geronimo only. At one point I pull the remote EJB code from OpenEJB 1.0 into OpenEJB 2.0 and people got quietly mad for bringing "legacy" code forward. The mailing list is dead in these years with most discussion and decisions made on the Geronimo list. The project is now significantly smaller than its original scope, everyone is telling me to stop trying to make it more. There is a lot of fighting in this time frame. 2006-2010 Work on OpenEJB 3.0 starts and this project regains technical freedom from Geronimo. Dain Sundstrom leaves Geronimo in this timeframe, wants to make up for killing OpenEJB 1.0 and puts his weight behind OpenEJB 3.0. OpenEJB 3.0 is based on OpenEJB 1.0 and the work towards an embeddable EJB container and a Tomcat integration continue where they left off. There was some discomfort, skepticism and grumbling in the Geronimo community but largely ripping out the old EJB container and putting in the new old EJB container was tolerated. Enjoyed, no, tolerated, yes. It was enjoyed perhaps a bit later. The embeddable container is a strong feature and brings new people into the project. The project is bigger than any of the scopes it has had previously. Codebase grows 5x from roughly 50k lines of code to 250k lines of code. 2010-2014 At this point "OpenEJB" is just shy of a full Java EE implementation and desire to push it to the next level is high. The Tomcat-OpenEJB integration is pushed. Momentarily called Tomtom, then finally called TomEE. Certification happens, the first TomEE releases are made. The project is renamed and the website referencing OpenEJB is changed to TomEE. The project enjoys amazing success. Things get busy fast. Geronimo says nothing about TomEE competing it its space, is supportive and begins using some additional TomEE/OpenEJB libraries like the jaxb tree. Xbean-finder is born originally created in OpenEJB/TomEE and moved to Geronimo. The project is bigger than any of the scopes it has had previously and the charter is updated. Codebase grows 2x from roughly 250k to 520k lines
Re: [VOTE] Explore creating a reusable JWT Library
does this mean a reusable JWT library external to TomEE, or within the
TomEE project?
i have to agree with previous statements i read that TomEE is a bundle
of libraries and not really the place to locate reusable pluggable
projects. it is more like the place where you might plug a project in
once it is working
On 19/03/2018 11:39, Jonathan Gallimore wrote:
What's the other vote ("Geronimo one")?
Jon
On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 6:33 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau
wrote:
Hey David,
How does this vote relates to the geronimo one you launched?
Are they purely concurrent or can they be conditional one for the other?
Le 19 mars 2018 01:03, "David Blevins" a écrit :
The vote for merging PR 123 does not address community will on what to do
with the code beyond merging it. One can realistically vote +1 to merge
the code, but then desire to see the code cleaned up and moved elsewhere.
One can realistically desire seeing an attempt to clean up the code to
find
what is reusable and may wish to withhold a final decision until we see
how
fruitful such a module would be.
Out of respect for people who may not know exactly how they feel (TomEE
or
Geronimo), this is a vote for the latter.
Vote: Should we attempt to extract code from the JWT PR to see what is
reusable and how successful such a jar would be?
+1 Let's give it a shot here
+-0
-1 Let's do this elsewhere
If the vote is +1 to attempt an extraction of reusable code here, final
conclusion of if that extraction is worth it or where it should live is
not
being voted on. People are welcome to decide differently based on the
results of the exercise.
-David
Re: What is this project?
Hello David, Thank you very much for sharing your history of what is now known as TomEE ! Maybe could you push it to the site in some place like "project history" ? It would be a shame to loose this opportunity to share it : memory is a sane way to make the future possible; please share if possible. Note: I love the "TomTom" temporary name: it would have given an excellent 'positioning' for the project... But okay, copyright issues wouldn't allow it, to bad! Thanks, Alexandre 2018-03-22 3:04 GMT+01:00 David Blevins : >> On Mar 19, 2018, at 2:45 AM, Mark Struberg wrote: >> >> Let's face it TomEE is mostly an aggregator. A great one, I really love it - >> but still. >> [...] >> Folks, you have to stop thinking as TomEE as being the center of the world. >> I love TomEE and it's a great aggregator and a great community. > > Everyone is free to have a perspective on what this project is and it's ok > for it not to be the same. It almost never is. It ebbs and it flows and > that is natural. As long as we're clear when we say "TomEE is..." we are > expressing our own opinions, we're ok. > > People tend to think of the project in terms of when they came in. Their > "OpenEJB is x" or "TomEE is x" seems to reflect around the time they got > commit. > > I've put together a timeline of how I've experienced the project. I think > people should dream for more. It's the best part about open source and what > got us even this far. > > If you look at this timeline you see all the growth periods are people > deciding that this is where they wanted to work and they we're the most > flexible on what that was. Even to the point of turning an EJB container > into a Java EE platform. > > -- > 1999-2001 > > Project is born as an EJB library. Not quite a full EJB implementation. It > is envisioned as an EJB Container with the EJB Server part being implemented > by a full app server. The vision was to strategically not implement the > server part so true app servers would integrate the project as a library. > Resources are abundant, people are everywhere. > > Many people on the project want to implement the server portion and make the > project more than it is. Myself and Richard tell them no. Speaking for > myself, I was a newbie idiot in this phase of the project. > > 2001-2003 > > Funding has dropped from the project, everyone from the original community > but Daniel, Jacek and Alan have gone. I see it now as a full EJB > implementation and perhaps a bit more. The Tomcat integration is born so > Tomcat can have an EJB implementation. The embedded EJB container for > testing is heavily pushed. The full remote protocol is created. The project > is now bigger than its original scope, but only slightly. Generally, there > are no resources and not many people around. > > 2003-2006 > > Geronimo is launched and the project is flooded with new people excited about > Geronimo's future. OpenEJB 1.0 is abandoned for OpenEJB 2.0 which is a total > rewrite of EJB on the Geronimo kernel and module system. Tomcat integration > and embedded EJB concepts are trashed. I still see this as a project that > can live on its own and be more and something I'd love to see grow in scope. > Everyone on Geronimo, but me, sees it as a library for Geronimo only. At one > point I pull the remote EJB code from OpenEJB 1.0 into OpenEJB 2.0 and people > got quietly mad for bringing "legacy" code forward. The mailing list is dead > in these years with most discussion and decisions made on the Geronimo list. > The project is now significantly smaller than its original scope, everyone is > telling me to stop trying to make it more. There is a lot of fighting in > this time frame. > > 2006-2010 > > Work on OpenEJB 3.0 starts and this project regains technical freedom from > Geronimo. Dain Sundstrom leaves Geronimo in this timeframe, wants to make up > for killing OpenEJB 1.0 and puts his weight behind OpenEJB 3.0. OpenEJB 3.0 > is based on OpenEJB 1.0 and the work towards an embeddable EJB container and > a Tomcat integration continue where they left off. There was some > discomfort, skepticism and grumbling in the Geronimo community but largely > ripping out the old EJB container and putting in the new old EJB container > was tolerated. Enjoyed, no, tolerated, yes. It was enjoyed perhaps a bit > later. The embeddable container is a strong feature and brings new people > into the project. > > The project is bigger than any of the scopes it has had previously. Codebase > grows 5x from roughly 50k lines of code to 250k lines of code. > > 2010-2014 > > At this point "OpenEJB" is just shy of a full Java EE implementation and > desire to push it to the next level is high. The Tomcat-OpenEJB integration > is pushed. Momentarily called Tomtom, then finally called TomEE. > Certification happens, the first TomEE releases are made. The project is > renamed and the websit
