Re: Draft Proposal for overall website direction

2020-02-18 Thread David Jencks
Sorry for top posting… I might have a slightly different direction to look in.

Thinking about some of the comments along the lines of “jbake is good enough” 
I’ve realized that, for me, the main benefit Antora brings over anything else 
I’m aware of is that it helps you organize your content in a sensible yet very 
flexible way.

I’d like to draw an analogy to the ant-vs.-maven controversy, if anyone 
remembers that far back :-)  They are both build tools that take your java 
source and use the java compiler to create class files.  Aren’t they just the 
same then?  Well, would you suggest taking TomEE to an ant-based build?  
Perhaps not…. maven suggests a project organization that makes good sense for 
most java projects, and does about 70-99% of the organizational work for you.

Perhaps similarly, Antora more or less enforces a simple sensible documentation 
organization, and provides a simple consistent way to get a nice looking 
website out with almost no configuration needed.

This documentation project is much larger than I anticipated at first, and the 
hard part is finding all the content and figuring out a plausible organization. 
 I think I’ve found pretty much everything, and have a preliminary 
organization.  Admittedly I’m strongly biased in favor of Antora, but I would 
never have considered the project of even collecting all the existing content 
without the organization Antora provides.

That said, I’m fairly amazed at how much of Antora’s functionality David has 
compressed into the tomcat-site-generator.  However, it’s incomplete, 
undocumented, unmaintained, and buggy.  I suggest that maintaining something 
like that is not what anyone involved in TomEE wants to be spending their time 
on.

One possible other factor to consider is that my interest here is primarily in 
finding out what it’s like to migrate a moderately complex disorganized website 
to Antora, and investigating what extensions or outside work (such as javadoc) 
are needed. I’m really not interested in participating in other solutions.  I 
expect to continue until I get something I’m satisfied with or I get tired.  I 
think I already have pretty much all the content as Asciidoctor, and I hope to 
get it to idiomatic error-free asciidoc. If the community wants a non-Antora 
solution it should be moderately straightforward to de-Antora-ize the content, 
but it’s not something I’m likely to be participating in.

In partial answer to David’s last question, I think one reason for the doc 
decay was allowing too many choices, so that it quickly became too hard to 
figure out how to do anything.

Thanks
David Jencks




> On Feb 18, 2020, at 1:27 PM, David Blevins  wrote:
> 
>> On Feb 18, 2020, at 12:57 PM, Guillermo García  wrote:
>> 
>> I don't want to open a difficult debate about which technology is the best,
>> but in the worst case is it possible to call a committee for a votation?
>> How the TomEE committers team defines which direction to take in these
>> cases?
> 
> We definitely still need much more discussion and participation to hammer out 
> all the topics on this.  In ideal situations you can find agreement on parts 
> and then reduce the scope of what's being discussed so where people disagree 
> is more clear.  That often allows it to be more easily addressed.
> 
> When you've done a good job on all that and everyone feels they understand 
> what's being discussed and are all "talked out", it's a definite sign a vote 
> is the only remaining way to move forward and you hold one.
> 
> Some projects are pretty strict about whose votes count.  Some say just votes 
> from the PMC members count (small group).  Some say just the committers 
> (slightly larger).  We've typically been pretty open and say everyone's votes 
> count; it's hard to grow a project while telling people who are your future 
> growth, "your vote doesn't count." :)
> 
> On this topic specifically, I also agree with David on several things and I 
> definitely don't feel "talked out", so at least for my perspective, we're 
> aways away from voting on anything.
> 
> More participation will definitely help the discussion along.
> 
> There's an entire facet of this discussion we probably should be talking 
> about which is how to deal with our heaps of content in various states of 
> health; how did it get unhealthy, how do we deal with it, how do we prevent 
> it, how do we encourage more contribution to main docs.
> 
> I think any tool in the hands of someone willing to lead an effort to improve 
> our main docs is a good tool.
> 
> 
> -David
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 



Re: Docker images for 8.0.0

2020-02-18 Thread Jenkins, Rodney J (Rod)
Pull request created.

May be another example of something to include on automated testing.

Thanks,
Rod.


On 2/18/20, 2:25 PM, "Jonathan Gallimore"  wrote:

Nationwide Information Security Warning: This is an external email. Do not 
click on links or open attachments unless you trust the sender.

--

> Being I am newer to the project,  I am assuming that microprofile was
introduced in 7.1.  Can someone confirm that?  If so, I need to remove it
from the images.

That's correct. Thanks Rod.

Jon

On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 8:21 PM Jenkins, Rodney J (Rod) <
jenki...@nationwide.com> wrote:

> While working with the Docker-hub folks, they pointed out that I have a
> Dockerfile for microprofile for 7.0.7.  However, I do not see microprofile
> files listed here:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/tomee/tomee-7.0.7/
>
> Being I am newer to the project,  I am assuming that microprofile was
> introduced in 7.1.  Can someone confirm that?  If so, I need to remove it
> from the images.
>
> Thanks,
> Rod.
>
>
> On 2/14/20, 11:06 AM, "Jenkins, Rodney J (Rod)" 
> wrote:
>
> Nationwide Information Security Warning: This is an external email. Do
> not click on links or open attachments unless you trust the sender.
>
> 
--
>
> Agree with the comments and fixed.
>
> Thank you for approving me as a contributor.
>
> Rod.
>
>
> On 2/14/20, 5:34 AM, "Jonathan Gallimore" <
> jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Nationwide Information Security Warning: This is an external
> email. Do not click on links or open attachments unless you trust the
> sender.
>
> 
--
>
> Rod
>
> Are you able to handle the feedback on this PR, specifically
> around image
> tags? https://github.com/docker-library/official-images/pull/7471
>
> Thanks
>
> Jon
>
> On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 8:48 PM Jonathan Gallimore <
> jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Thanks Rod!
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 8:06 PM Jenkins, Rodney J (Rod) <
> > jenki...@nationwide.com> wrote:
> >
> >> FYI to all
> >>
> >> Jon merged the pull request this morning.  I created a Pull
> Request to
> >> the official images.  It can be found here:
> >> https://github.com/docker-library/official-images/pull/7471
> >>
> >> I should note that the new versions are:  7.0.6, 7.1.2, 8.0.1
> (I am not
> >> sure why this thread says 8.0.0)
> >>
> >> I would expect the new versions to be live in a couple of days.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Rod.
> >>
> >>
> >> On 2/5/20, 3:24 PM, "Jenkins, Rodney J (Rod)" <
> jenki...@nationwide.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> Nationwide Information Security Warning: This is an
> external email.
> >> Do not click on links or open attachments unless you trust the
> sender.
> >>
> >>
> 
--
> >>
> >> Jon,
> >>
> >> Is there anything I need to do to get the Docker images
> released?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Rod.
> >>
> >>
> >> On 1/23/20, 12:58 PM, "Jenkins, Rodney J (Rod)" <
> >> jenki...@nationwide.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Nationwide Information Security Warning: This is an
> external
> >> email. Do not click on links or open attachments unless you
> trust the
> >> sender.
> >>
> >>
> 
--
> >>
> >> For now, I just made sure they all built successfully.
> They did
> >> and you can see my latest on the pull request.
> >>
> >> For the future, I am undecided.  Maybe that it is just
> enough
> >> that TomEE is well tested before we get to Docker.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Rod.
> >>
> >>
> >> On 1/22/20, 3:05 PM, "Jonathan Gallimore" <
> >> jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> wrote

Re: Draft Proposal for overall website direction

2020-02-18 Thread David Blevins
> On Feb 18, 2020, at 12:57 PM, Guillermo García  wrote:
> 
> I don't want to open a difficult debate about which technology is the best,
> but in the worst case is it possible to call a committee for a votation?
> How the TomEE committers team defines which direction to take in these
> cases?

We definitely still need much more discussion and participation to hammer out 
all the topics on this.  In ideal situations you can find agreement on parts 
and then reduce the scope of what's being discussed so where people disagree is 
more clear.  That often allows it to be more easily addressed.

When you've done a good job on all that and everyone feels they understand 
what's being discussed and are all "talked out", it's a definite sign a vote is 
the only remaining way to move forward and you hold one.

Some projects are pretty strict about whose votes count.  Some say just votes 
from the PMC members count (small group).  Some say just the committers 
(slightly larger).  We've typically been pretty open and say everyone's votes 
count; it's hard to grow a project while telling people who are your future 
growth, "your vote doesn't count." :)

On this topic specifically, I also agree with David on several things and I 
definitely don't feel "talked out", so at least for my perspective, we're aways 
away from voting on anything.

More participation will definitely help the discussion along.

There's an entire facet of this discussion we probably should be talking about 
which is how to deal with our heaps of content in various states of health; how 
did it get unhealthy, how do we deal with it, how do we prevent it, how do we 
encourage more contribution to main docs.

I think any tool in the hands of someone willing to lead an effort to improve 
our main docs is a good tool.


-David










Re: Draft Proposal for overall website direction

2020-02-18 Thread Guillermo García
Hi Hilberto,

I have been following some David's ideas and I agree with him in the
direction of using Antora.  I consider Antora in a mature state to let us
manage the website efficiently. And I am not worried about learning a new
tool, even if it is jbake.

I don't want to open a difficult debate about which technology is the best,
but in the worst case is it possible to call a committee for a votation?
How the TomEE committers team defines which direction to take in these
cases?


Best,

Guillermo

On Tue, Feb 18, 2020, 2:49 PM David Jencks  wrote:

> Antora already supports “edit this page". Some pages in the current site
> have a button for it, but I don’t know if it works.
>
> David Jencks
>
> > On Feb 18, 2020, at 10:43 AM, gilbertoca  wrote:
> >
> > I would stick with jvm tool (jbake) instead of add/learn one
> > more(node-antora). Specially I would to suggest we adopt what our Apache
> > Netbeans friends have done with jbake (jbake.org) in thier site
> > (https://netbeans.apache.org/). There, in each page you have a button
> ("See
> > this page in GitHub") where you/anyone can edit the original asciidoc
> file
> > and make PR for contribution.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Gilberto
> >
> >
> > David Blevins-2 wrote
> >> All,
> >>
> >> I have a draft of something we can kick around for our website overall.
> >>
> >> -
> >>
> https://github.com/apache/tomee-site-generator/blob/master/WEBSITE-2020.adoc
> >>
> >> This took 3 hours to write so apologies for the size.  Much of this is
> >> experience from all the efforts of the past, some imagined improvements
> to
> >> successful parts of the site, while paving the way for the Antora work.
> >>
> >> Food on the table, cranky wife!  Must go!
> >>
> >> Sorry for the short email! :)
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> David Blevins
> >> http://twitter.com/dblevins
> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Sent from:
> http://tomee-openejb.979440.n4.nabble.com/TomEE-Dev-f982480.html
>
>


Re: Draft Proposal for overall website direction

2020-02-18 Thread David Blevins
Everyone should follow Gilberto's example and jump into the conversation.

It's common on open source for two people to race out ahead of everyone.  The 
train looks like it's moving fast and jumping in looks dangerous, so people get 
intimidated and that compounds.  Trains that go too fast often derail.

Jumping even with questions is a huge contribution.  You don't need to jump in 
with an expert opinion.  Just jump :)


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

> On Feb 18, 2020, at 10:43 AM, gilbertoca  wrote:
> 
> I would stick with jvm tool (jbake) instead of add/learn one
> more(node-antora). Specially I would to suggest we adopt what our Apache
> Netbeans friends have done with jbake (jbake.org) in thier site
> (https://netbeans.apache.org/). There, in each page you have a button ("See
> this page in GitHub") where you/anyone can edit the original asciidoc file
> and make PR for contribution.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Gilberto
> 
> 
> David Blevins-2 wrote
>> All,
>> 
>> I have a draft of something we can kick around for our website overall.
>> 
>> -
>> https://github.com/apache/tomee-site-generator/blob/master/WEBSITE-2020.adoc
>> 
>> This took 3 hours to write so apologies for the size.  Much of this is
>> experience from all the efforts of the past, some imagined improvements to
>> successful parts of the site, while paving the way for the Antora work.
>> 
>> Food on the table, cranky wife!  Must go!
>> 
>> Sorry for the short email! :)
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> David Blevins
>> http://twitter.com/dblevins
>> http://www.tomitribe.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Sent from: http://tomee-openejb.979440.n4.nabble.com/TomEE-Dev-f982480.html



Re: Docker images for 8.0.0

2020-02-18 Thread Jonathan Gallimore
> Being I am newer to the project,  I am assuming that microprofile was
introduced in 7.1.  Can someone confirm that?  If so, I need to remove it
from the images.

That's correct. Thanks Rod.

Jon

On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 8:21 PM Jenkins, Rodney J (Rod) <
jenki...@nationwide.com> wrote:

> While working with the Docker-hub folks, they pointed out that I have a
> Dockerfile for microprofile for 7.0.7.  However, I do not see microprofile
> files listed here:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/tomee/tomee-7.0.7/
>
> Being I am newer to the project,  I am assuming that microprofile was
> introduced in 7.1.  Can someone confirm that?  If so, I need to remove it
> from the images.
>
> Thanks,
> Rod.
>
>
> On 2/14/20, 11:06 AM, "Jenkins, Rodney J (Rod)" 
> wrote:
>
> Nationwide Information Security Warning: This is an external email. Do
> not click on links or open attachments unless you trust the sender.
>
> --
>
> Agree with the comments and fixed.
>
> Thank you for approving me as a contributor.
>
> Rod.
>
>
> On 2/14/20, 5:34 AM, "Jonathan Gallimore" <
> jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Nationwide Information Security Warning: This is an external
> email. Do not click on links or open attachments unless you trust the
> sender.
>
> --
>
> Rod
>
> Are you able to handle the feedback on this PR, specifically
> around image
> tags? https://github.com/docker-library/official-images/pull/7471
>
> Thanks
>
> Jon
>
> On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 8:48 PM Jonathan Gallimore <
> jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Thanks Rod!
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 8:06 PM Jenkins, Rodney J (Rod) <
> > jenki...@nationwide.com> wrote:
> >
> >> FYI to all
> >>
> >> Jon merged the pull request this morning.  I created a Pull
> Request to
> >> the official images.  It can be found here:
> >> https://github.com/docker-library/official-images/pull/7471
> >>
> >> I should note that the new versions are:  7.0.6, 7.1.2, 8.0.1
> (I am not
> >> sure why this thread says 8.0.0)
> >>
> >> I would expect the new versions to be live in a couple of days.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Rod.
> >>
> >>
> >> On 2/5/20, 3:24 PM, "Jenkins, Rodney J (Rod)" <
> jenki...@nationwide.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> Nationwide Information Security Warning: This is an
> external email.
> >> Do not click on links or open attachments unless you trust the
> sender.
> >>
> >>
> --
> >>
> >> Jon,
> >>
> >> Is there anything I need to do to get the Docker images
> released?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Rod.
> >>
> >>
> >> On 1/23/20, 12:58 PM, "Jenkins, Rodney J (Rod)" <
> >> jenki...@nationwide.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Nationwide Information Security Warning: This is an
> external
> >> email. Do not click on links or open attachments unless you
> trust the
> >> sender.
> >>
> >>
> --
> >>
> >> For now, I just made sure they all built successfully.
> They did
> >> and you can see my latest on the pull request.
> >>
> >> For the future, I am undecided.  Maybe that it is just
> enough
> >> that TomEE is well tested before we get to Docker.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Rod.
> >>
> >>
> >> On 1/22/20, 3:05 PM, "Jonathan Gallimore" <
> >> jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Nationwide Information Security Warning: This is an
> external
> >> email. Do not click on links or open attachments unless you
> trust the
> >> sender.
> >>
> >>
> --
> >>
> >> How far do you want to go with testing? Personally
> I think a
> >> quick
> >> automated smoke test would be perfect. The
> distributions are
> >> already tested
> >> in quite a lot of depth in the build, so I'm not
> sure we need
> >> to repeat
> >> that in Docker. That's a development view on the
> problem, I'm
> >> quite
> >> interested in what consumers of the Dockers would
> expect.
> >>
> >> Jon
> >>
>   

Re: Docker images for 8.0.0

2020-02-18 Thread Jenkins, Rodney J (Rod)
While working with the Docker-hub folks, they pointed out that I have a 
Dockerfile for microprofile for 7.0.7.  However, I do not see microprofile 
files listed here:  
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/tomee/tomee-7.0.7/

Being I am newer to the project,  I am assuming that microprofile was 
introduced in 7.1.  Can someone confirm that?  If so, I need to remove it from 
the images.

Thanks,
Rod.


On 2/14/20, 11:06 AM, "Jenkins, Rodney J (Rod)"  
wrote:

Nationwide Information Security Warning: This is an external email. Do not 
click on links or open attachments unless you trust the sender.

--

Agree with the comments and fixed.

Thank you for approving me as a contributor.

Rod.


On 2/14/20, 5:34 AM, "Jonathan Gallimore"  
wrote:

Nationwide Information Security Warning: This is an external email. Do 
not click on links or open attachments unless you trust the sender.

--

Rod

Are you able to handle the feedback on this PR, specifically around 
image
tags? https://github.com/docker-library/official-images/pull/7471

Thanks

Jon

On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 8:48 PM Jonathan Gallimore <
jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Thanks Rod!
>
> On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 8:06 PM Jenkins, Rodney J (Rod) <
> jenki...@nationwide.com> wrote:
>
>> FYI to all
>>
>> Jon merged the pull request this morning.  I created a Pull Request 
to
>> the official images.  It can be found here:
>> https://github.com/docker-library/official-images/pull/7471
>>
>> I should note that the new versions are:  7.0.6, 7.1.2, 8.0.1 (I am 
not
>> sure why this thread says 8.0.0)
>>
>> I would expect the new versions to be live in a couple of days.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Rod.
>>
>>
>> On 2/5/20, 3:24 PM, "Jenkins, Rodney J (Rod)" 

>> wrote:
>>
>> Nationwide Information Security Warning: This is an external 
email.
>> Do not click on links or open attachments unless you trust the 
sender.
>>
>> 
--
>>
>> Jon,
>>
>> Is there anything I need to do to get the Docker images released?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Rod.
>>
>>
>> On 1/23/20, 12:58 PM, "Jenkins, Rodney J (Rod)" <
>> jenki...@nationwide.com> wrote:
>>
>> Nationwide Information Security Warning: This is an external
>> email. Do not click on links or open attachments unless you trust the
>> sender.
>>
>> 
--
>>
>> For now, I just made sure they all built successfully.  They 
did
>> and you can see my latest on the pull request.
>>
>> For the future, I am undecided.  Maybe that it is just enough
>> that TomEE is well tested before we get to Docker.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Rod.
>>
>>
>> On 1/22/20, 3:05 PM, "Jonathan Gallimore" <
>> jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Nationwide Information Security Warning: This is an 
external
>> email. Do not click on links or open attachments unless you trust the
>> sender.
>>
>> 
--
>>
>> How far do you want to go with testing? Personally I 
think a
>> quick
>> automated smoke test would be perfect. The distributions 
are
>> already tested
>> in quite a lot of depth in the build, so I'm not sure we 
need
>> to repeat
>> that in Docker. That's a development view on the 
problem, I'm
>> quite
>> interested in what consumers of the Dockers would expect.
>>
>> Jon
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 6:22 PM Jenkins, Rodney J (Rod) <
>> jenki...@nationwide.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Jon,
>> >
>> > I was able to get it to build, thank you!!!
>> >
>> > This leads me to a larger concern:  Testing of the 
docker
>> images.   I am
>> > open to ideas on how to test these images I create.
>> Currently, I spot
 

Re: Draft Proposal for overall website direction

2020-02-18 Thread David Jencks
Antora already supports “edit this page". Some pages in the current site have a 
button for it, but I don’t know if it works.

David Jencks

> On Feb 18, 2020, at 10:43 AM, gilbertoca  wrote:
> 
> I would stick with jvm tool (jbake) instead of add/learn one
> more(node-antora). Specially I would to suggest we adopt what our Apache
> Netbeans friends have done with jbake (jbake.org) in thier site
> (https://netbeans.apache.org/). There, in each page you have a button ("See
> this page in GitHub") where you/anyone can edit the original asciidoc file
> and make PR for contribution.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Gilberto
> 
> 
> David Blevins-2 wrote
>> All,
>> 
>> I have a draft of something we can kick around for our website overall.
>> 
>> -
>> https://github.com/apache/tomee-site-generator/blob/master/WEBSITE-2020.adoc
>> 
>> This took 3 hours to write so apologies for the size.  Much of this is
>> experience from all the efforts of the past, some imagined improvements to
>> successful parts of the site, while paving the way for the Antora work.
>> 
>> Food on the table, cranky wife!  Must go!
>> 
>> Sorry for the short email! :)
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> David Blevins
>> http://twitter.com/dblevins
>> http://www.tomitribe.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Sent from: http://tomee-openejb.979440.n4.nabble.com/TomEE-Dev-f982480.html



Re: Draft Proposal for overall website direction

2020-02-18 Thread gilbertoca
I would stick with jvm tool (jbake) instead of add/learn one
more(node-antora). Specially I would to suggest we adopt what our Apache
Netbeans friends have done with jbake (jbake.org) in thier site
(https://netbeans.apache.org/). There, in each page you have a button ("See
this page in GitHub") where you/anyone can edit the original asciidoc file
and make PR for contribution.

Regards,

Gilberto


David Blevins-2 wrote
> All,
> 
> I have a draft of something we can kick around for our website overall.
> 
>  -
> https://github.com/apache/tomee-site-generator/blob/master/WEBSITE-2020.adoc
> 
> This took 3 hours to write so apologies for the size.  Much of this is
> experience from all the efforts of the past, some imagined improvements to
> successful parts of the site, while paving the way for the Antora work.
> 
> Food on the table, cranky wife!  Must go!
> 
> Sorry for the short email! :)
> 
> 
> -- 
> David Blevins
> http://twitter.com/dblevins
> http://www.tomitribe.com





--
Sent from: http://tomee-openejb.979440.n4.nabble.com/TomEE-Dev-f982480.html