unsubscribe On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 6:44 PM, Mark Struberg <[email protected]> wrote:
> Alan, I understand that you don't want to put much more energy into this > project. That is totally understandable and fine. > But while you are PMC chair you still cannot declare that the project is > dead as long as there are enough PMC members still active to keep the > project going. > > > Before we dump the project I suggest we start with an analysis of where we > are right now. > > What about starting look into > .) Who is still active and willing to continue Geronimo as a ee-commons > project? > .) Which project parts of the project are of some shared interest and > might be good to get some maintenance love and some realistic chance that > this is gonna happening? > > txs and LieGrue, > strub > > > > Am 08.03.2017 um 16:38 schrieb Alan Cabrera <[email protected]>: > > > > I agree and I even acknowledged that below, but what I feel Mark and you > are not acknowledging is that the interest/activity is for a smaller subset > of JEE. Of that subset, even you list the OSS projects that are supporting > the JEE bits that are still relevant. They have active communities and are > even likely to be using our implementation of our specs, but that is not > reflective of the viability of Geronimo as an active JEE project at the ASF. > > > > Let us keep in mind that the raison d’être of Geronimo is the complete > implementation of the JEE standard. The JEE spec licensing that the > project is bound to goes through excruciating lengths to make sure that the > spec is implemented in toto and not piecemeal. Given that the overwhelming > bulk of the code is simply an inclusion of external OSS projects, when the > existing active OSS projects are factored out there’s not a lot left. > There’s no denying that much of what’s left is good technology. It’s just > not enough to jumpstart a new active OSS community. And this is the crux > of the matter, community. > > > > Does Geronimo still have good technology? Yes. > > > > When one factors out the existing OSS overlap, is it enough to jumpstart > a new active community? No. > > > > A few engineers applying patches once a year is not an active > community. To be sure the downstream OSS projects are appreciative. > However, what’s the point? The engineering activity here is really a proxy > for other OSS projects and not indicative of the viability of Geronimo as > an active ASF project. Things get fixed and released, but in the end the > wider community goes to the other OSS projects to consume those artifacts. > > > > Geronimo had a great run. It made significant contributions to the > industry. However, the relevancy of the JEE spec has wained and the dearth > of activity is concrete proof of that. > > > > With that said, this does not prevent a set of enterprising engineers > with “can do” attitudes to pick over the bones that are in the Attic and > create another application server. But that effort, IMO, will need to be > borne in the Incubator. > > > > > > Regards, > > Alan > > > > > >> On Mar 8, 2017, at 1:34 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > >> I share that vision (the one of Mark). > >> > >> The ee-commons part is really used and still active (even if in > maintenance mode for several parts) and we need to ensure other projects > can still rely on it (karaf, tomee, owb, meecrowave, openjpa, ... plus > several open source ones). > >> > >> EE is also not dead, likely no more trendy since server side techno is > no more a challenge but still a real need. > >> > >> Geronimo AppService not being really developped or maintained anymore I > can see it being frozen (attic or not is a detail IMO) but other parts are > still a very good fit for Geronimo community IMO. > >> > >> > >> Romain Manni-Bucau > >> @rmannibucau | Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn | JavaEE Factory > >> > >> 2017-03-08 10:26 GMT+01:00 Mark Struberg <[email protected]>: > >> I see no lack of interest in Java EE to be honest. Of course > Microservices are currently spilled high on the hype cycle, but that will > quickly blow up imo. > >> MS architecture is only very good for a certain kind of application. > For most business apps the granularity is way too fine grain and the > missing TX handling is often a showstopper (even if Managers don't see this > yet). > >> > >> You are certainly right that there is a lack of interest in the *huge* > big-iron app servers! > >> So yes, TomEE, Meecrowave etc fill the sweet spot which is interesting > for 85% of apps. > >> > >> I also do not have a problem with the missing TCK. Of course it would > be better to have one. But the only real progress is currently in CDI and > BVal and those TCKs are available under ALv2 even. > >> > >> The main problem imo is that the Geronimo server part is not actively > maintained anymore and OSGi is not a really good fit for JavaEE anyway. Not > that OSGi itself is bad, but it's not a good fit. > >> Don't get me wrong, the Geronimo AppServer was a big step 14 years ago, > and all the people involved in this effort back then layed a rock solid > fundament for all that came after that. But the architecture is still quite > outdated imo and it didn't get maintained for way too long. > >> > >> > >> Otoh there is really a lot of good technology available inside the > geronimo project. > >> > >> * geronimo-jta > >> * javamail > >> * xbean (including finder, scanner etc) > >> * the specs > >> and quite a few other nice parts and they still get committs and love. > >> > >> I'd definitly keep them alive. > >> > >> I'm aware that quite some older PMC members have historically been > interested in the Geronimo AppServer and not in maintaining the ee-commons > part of the geronimo project. > >> But instead of dumping the whole project I'd say we just retire the > Geronimo AppServer and consolidate and focus on the single pieces. There > are potentially other things like Sirona-incubating which we could move > over as sub-projects even. > >> > >> Of course I perfectly understand if some of the older PMC members which > are not interested in the adopted roadmap want to retire. > >> > >> txs for all the hard work! > >> > >> LieGrue, > >> strub > >> > >> > >> > Am 07.03.2017 um 22:44 schrieb Alan Cabrera <[email protected]>: > >> > > >> > IMO, consultants and researchers are the earthworms of a vibrant OS > community that meets the standards sought after at the ASF. I don’t see > how we’re going to attract them. While the ideas posited on the mailing > lists are pretty interesting, I just don’t see any of the ideas attracting > a larger active community. The reasons for this are > >> > • the lack of interest in JEE > >> > • inability to use a reasonably current JEE TCK > >> > • the size and age of the legacy code base > >> > • project members unable to commit time resources to mentor new > members > >> > When one reads about JEE not being “dead yet”, one is actually > reading about a very small subset of the JEE spec. To be sure, there are > interesting problems still to be solved within certain silos of JEE. I > can’t think of anything that would apply to the entire pantheon of JEE > bits; imo TomEE is already focused on the sweet spot of JEE bits that are > still relevant. One is hard pressed to think of any JEE sub-system in > Geronimo that is not already separate project. The reality is that Geronimo > was an amalgam of OSS projects and the industry has preserved those JEE > bits that are still relevant. The "value add", in no small part, of > Geronimo was the comprehensive testing of the JEE pantheon in toto via the > TCK. > >> > > >> > Given that we cannot use a reasonably current JEE TCK, the project is > prevented from engaging in a role of JEE-commons of sorts. Frankly, even > if we were to get the current JEE TCK, nobody really cares anymore and, as > I mentioned above, the interesting JEE bits are already being worked on > elsewhere with their own specific TCKs. > >> > > >> > The size and age of the codebase makes it virtually impenetrable. > When one precludes spec commits, I think the last real commit has been > about a half a decade ago; I wouldn’t be surprised if it was longer. I > personally have been knee deep in it recently but find spelunking through > it very daunting. I’d rather spend any free time I have in some greenfield > endeavor. > >> > > >> > I’m certain that other project members and passersby are of the same > mind. Since I have such little time to do greenfield coding, I have even > less time to mentor someone who is interested in tinkering with the code > base. I’ve no doubt that others are of the same mind on this as well; > witness the dearth of replies to inquiries on this list. > >> > > >> > There is a lot of blood, sweat, and tears in this project. I, for > one, am honored to have been able to work with the world’s brightest coders > on the planet. I have a lot of great memories, and hangovers, of our once > vibrant community and it’s very hard for me to start this thread. I think > we should shutdown. If anyone had a real interest in any kind of > resurrection it would have happened by now. > >> > > >> > If we have consensus on moving to the Attic, I will start a vote. > How things are “wound down” will be discussed in a separate thread, soon to > follow. > >> > > >> > > >> > Regards, > >> > Alan Cabrera > >> > V.P. Apache Geronimo > >> > > >> > P.S. Please resist the urge hop in and administer CPR. Before > jumping on the table, be brutally honest and ask yourself if you are > operating on actionable facts, or fond well earned memories. > >> > > >> > > >> > >> > > > > -- Cheers, Dave
