> On Jun 17, 2022, at 11:23 AM, David Blevins <david.blev...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>> On Jun 14, 2022, at 10:09 PM, David Jencks <david.a.jen...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I think each impl. needs to be in its own git repo, I’m not sure which
>> already are.
>
> Agree. Currently connector and txmanager are in the same git repo.
>
>> I believe the tx manager is used in an OSGI spec impl in (I think) Aries. On
>> the other hand they might have copied the implementation. It might be
>> confusing if the governing project and/or package names change. I don’t know
>> if there are other uses, or how to find out.
>>
>> It might possibly be simpler, after we get each subproject into appropriate
>> git repos, to make people who want to work on these implementations geronimo
>> committers.
>
> I don't know if it helps the conversation, but we need a different version
> that's incompatible to what Aries and ActiveMQ uses. We would be
> developing and implementing jakarta.* implementations they couldn't use. For
> them to switch from javax to jakarta, they'd need to change all their
> dependencies anyway.
I expect eventually they will make the switch.
>
> Really the question being asked is does anyone mind if we develop separate
> Jakarta versions of the APIs on the TomEE side? It would be a little easier
> for us.
>
Do you expect to have a new unrelated tx manager implementation? I rather
expected something mostly changed via sed, and a major version bump. I don’t
think you put the jakarta TomEE in a new repo, did you?
However, I don’t really care as long as you leave a really obvious note behind
about where development has moved to.
David Jencks
>
> -David
>
>>> On Jun 14, 2022, at 9:36 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> No blocker from me (minor note being some are already on git so don't start
>>> back from svn ;))
>>>
>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>>> @rmannibucau | Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn | Book
>>>
>>>
>>> Le mar. 14 juin 2022 à 18:29, David Blevins <david.blev...@gmail.com> a
>>> écrit :
>>> Jumping off of this thread, is there any openness to discussing moving this
>>> code over to TomEE?
>>>
>>> - http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/components/txmanager/trunk/
>>> -
>>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/specs/trunk/geronimo-activation_2.0_spec/
>>> -
>>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/specs/trunk/geronimo-jakartamail_2.1_spec/
>>> -
>>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/specs/trunk/geronimo-mail_2.1_spec/
>>>
>>> These are on the critical path for TomEE, being updated in Jakarta EE 10.
>>> We're not working on Jakarta EE 10 yet, but we'll hopefully be doing that
>>> by early next year.
>>>
>>> It's a bit painful to send people over from the TomEE project to here and
>>> submit patches against SVN repos. It would be great if we could have them
>>> in git and under the TomEE PMC if possible.
>>>
>>> Thoughts?
>>>
>>>
>>> -David
>>>
>>>> On Jun 6, 2022, at 1:59 AM, fpapon <fpa...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> I would like to start a thread to discuss about the future of the Apache
>>>> Geronimo Microprofile implementation:
>>>>
>>>> https://geronimo.apache.org/microprofile/
>>>>
>>>> As we can see, we don't have a lot of traction about the maintenance of
>>>> the implementation to be up-to-date with the Microprofile specification.
>>>>
>>>> The J2EE Geronimo server is no longer exist and at Apache, the active EE
>>>> server seems to be Apache TomEE.
>>>>
>>>> May be it could make more sense to move the Microprofile implementation to
>>>> the Apache TomEE umbrella.
>>>>
>>>> WDYT?
>>>>
>>>> regards,
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> --
>>>> François
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
