Hey Jean-Louis, if I understood correctly, we are working to provide TomEE with SmallRye implementation. Have you shared some branches? Where is the code that you are working on? Not sure if I can help too much, but I could spend some time and put my eyes on it as well.
Thank you! Em sex., 15 de abr. de 2022 às 08:09, Jean-Louis Monteiro < jlmonte...@tomitribe.com> escreveu: > Hi, > > Following our discussion I went ahead and did the following > - yank all Geronimo MicroProfile implementations until we can update them > - update MicroProfile APIs to their latest and jakarta compatible versions > - add SmallRye implementations for Config, Fault-Tolerance, OpenAPI, > OpenTracing, Health and Metrics. > - Kept our JWT microprofile implementation > - Used CXF shaded and relocated version of the Rest Client > > Now, where are we? > Doing all that worked but does not make TomEE to now be MicroProfile > compliant. > I went ahead and also updated all TCK to use the latest TCK and jakarta > compatible version of MicroProfile. > > Unfortunately, SmallRye isn't like Geronimo so adding the libraries does > not make anything happen. We were failing in all specifications. It's just > a base set of libraries you can rely on, but ultimately, you need to write > some integration code. > > Did most of the integration for Config, Metrics, Health, JWT and > Rest-Client. Haven't started Fault-Tolerance and OpenAPI. > > - Config: we have 3 failures to look at. It might need some more code to > address edge cases. > - JWT: 22 failures and 12 not executed. Mainly a key issue. > - Metrics: all green, yeah > - Health: a few failures I'm working on now > - Rest Client: half failing or maybe more - tck setup or missing bits to > start with > - OpenAPI, Fault-tolerance: all failing or almost - no TCK setup or > integration code > > I'd appreciate some help as I feel like I'm not seeing the end of the > tunnel lol > > Hope it helps > > > > > > > > -- > Jean-Louis Monteiro > http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro > http://www.tomitribe.com > > > On Sat, Apr 2, 2022 at 11:13 AM Jean-Louis Monteiro < > jlmonte...@tomitribe.com> wrote: > >> Great discussion. Thanks everyone. >> >> I'll look at Sallrye over the weekend and see how hard it is to replace >> our Apache libraries. >> >> -- >> Jean-Louis Monteiro >> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro >> http://www.tomitribe.com >> >> >> On Fri, Apr 1, 2022 at 12:48 PM David Blevins <dblev...@tomitribe.com> >> wrote: >> >>> This is very close. The dangers of A are not quite captured. >>> Completely agree with the dangers of B. >>> >>> > On Apr 1, 2022, at 1:13 AM, Zowalla, Richard < >>> richard.zowa...@hs-heilbronn.de> wrote: >>> > >>> > So we basically have to options (if I understand the discussion >>> > correctly): >>> > >>> > (A) Put some effort / resources into upgrade our MP impls to the latest >>> > versions to fully support Jakarta namespace. From my understanding >>> > maintaining these impls is a bit PITA as MP tends to break its API >>> > every few months, right? It will take some time, effort and resources >>> > to catch up. >>> >>> The danger here is that we - due to lack of time / resources - will >>> continue to not be seen as a viable MicroProfile implementation. >>> >>> MicroProfile is approximately 70 months old. We were able to keep up >>> for only 1.5 months out of that 70. It was with TomEE 7.1, released with >>> MicroProfile 2.0 support in September of 2018, outdated by MicroProfile 2.1 >>> in October 2018. We were 27 months late to getting our first and only >>> MicroProfile version implemented, which is now 41 months out of date. >>> >>> > >>> > (B) Use existing MP impls to make "fast" progress on the TomEE 9.x >>> > side, which breaks the "we use apache impls"-credo but enables a faster >>> > move forward. I see the danger here that we - due to lack of time / >>> > resources - will not find the way back to our own Apache >>> > implementations and will stick with smallrye for a long (?) time >>> > perhaps. >>> >>> Correct. And as mentioned, not finding our way back to our own Apache >>> implementations has already been the status quo. >>> >>> > People are eager to use EE9 / Jakarta namespace and TomEE isn't really >>> > ready for it, yet. With the latest M7 version, users cannot start new >>> > projects as testing possibilities are super limited. >>> > >>> > Btw.: I am unsure, if we are still using Hibernate Validation in the >>> > current TomEE 9-M8 Snapshot. But if we do, we already broke the >>> > "everything from apache"-credo for the sake of getting the >>> > certifaction. >>> >>> Our certified distribution (Plume) used EclipseLink instead of OpenJPA, >>> Mojarra instead of MyFaces and Hibernate Bean Validation instead of BVal. >>> >>> >>> -David >>> >>> -- Daniel Cunha https://github.com/danielsoro https://twitter.com/danielvlcunha https://www.linkedin.com/in/danielvlcunha/
