Ok folks, it is enough from my side :) I hope that all understand my concerns and points. Currently Meecrowave is working like a TLP (its own page, release cycle , issues etc), from my opinion it must be a new proposal
I do not want to convert or diverge the owb project aim , written years ago https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/OpenWebBeansProposal Have a nice week! Gurkan > On 26 Jun 2017, at 13:39, Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]> wrote: > > 2017-06-26 12:32 GMT+02:00 Gurkan Erdogdu <[email protected]>: > >> >> Mark thanks for your comments >> >> Firstly, even if I am not an active committer of owb currently, as a >> founder and pmc member of the project, I am a keen observer of the project >> and have some words to say for the future of owb >> >> I am not a blocker of such initiative as Meecrowave but you are killing >> and diverting the owb as a main project (it is not just a subproject, it >> has own webpage, own release cycle, own issues etc like an another tlp >> project) >> >> For the tomcat integration , we had just been implenting plugins that >> allows to run owb in tomcat and openejb but they are not like a Meecrowave >> (they are the really subcomponents of owb). Then anybody can implement a >> new project based on owb, create own webpage and say that it is a >> subproject? >> > > Well not sure "anybody" can but fact is it failed and we never got them > working good enough for most of our users, meecrowave makes it smoother to > start and makes OWB a modern stack instead of an isolated library not > usable by itself which is where we are going due to java evolution if we > don't provide a ready to run solution (prod and dev). > > >> >> For the Tomee, it is really another story. One can say lot more about it >> but I do not want to get into to complicate the discussion. Just look at >> the Apache Geronimo destiny. Then you think to convert project name from >> owb to meecrowave like openejb to tomee? >> > > Hmm, maybe I didn't get your point but the parallel just sounds plain > wrong. OpenEJB/TomEE rebranding was a rebranding of the exact same > codebase, meecrowave is a *sub*project of openwebbeans (compliant to ASF > policy) and an OWB promoter as well as a solution. > > >> >> I am just saying the follow the ASF rules correctly and for the benefit >> of the community. Why not create a incubator proposal to implement such >> microprofile server runtime environment? And also future wise, independent >> of owb and work with any cdi, also implements microprofile specification? >> We can work together to write such incubator proposal >> > > Microprofile specification *DOESNT* exist for now so no point implementing > nothing ;). Also please note we respect all ASF rules and the board was > happy of the reports where we mentionned meecrowave so this looks wrong as > well. > > If meecrowave becomes way more than a complete and deep OWB/Tomcat/CXF > integration - which is not today - we can move it to an incubator or TLP > but today its community is mainly OWB one so it is consistent and the most > compliant to ASF rules to have it here I think. > > >> >> Also I missed the board report you mentioned, could you provide the link? >> > > @Mark: will you do? Can surely help later today to search in archives if > you don't have time. > > >> >> Thanks >> >> Gurkan >> >>> On 26 Jun 2017, at 11:01, Mark Struberg <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> >>> Gurkan, you probably missed something in the 5 years you have been >> inactive in OWB. >>> You are basically years late with discussing Meecrowave. We have >> discussed and decided this on the public mailing lists long ago. >>> >>> And we basically have Meecrowave since even much longer than that! We >> didn't bundle it, but we provide install scripts to 'enrich' Apache Tomcat >> with OWB since many years now. >>> >>>> We can also bring this issue in a board report and getting advice from >> the board >>> >>> We ALREADY checked our approach with the board and got the OK. This is >> really similar than TomEE which started as sub project of OpenEJB. It is >> perfectly fine with the foundation! >>> You probably missed all this work due to your absence. Though I'd like >> to state that I'd really happy if you'd become active again in OWB! >>> >>> As Romain already explained: >>> TomEE is based on OpenEJB and will always be. >>> Meecrowave is heavily based on OWB and will always be. >>> >>> We just separated it out into an own project because we heavily rely on >> Tomcat and would love to not mix up the release cycles of Tomcat and OWB >> core. >>> >>> LieGrue, >>> strub >>> >>> >>> >>>> Am 25.06.2017 um 20:43 schrieb Gurkan Erdogdu <[email protected]. >> INVALID>: >>>> >>>> Hi all >>>> >>>> As I said earlier , Meecrowave project needs to be seperated from owb, >> it has own project page, codebase, issues, release cycle etc. There are two >> options in here either Tomee subproject or new in incubator project. My >> binding vote will be -1 for such release otherwise. I know that incubator >> projects needs much more admin work but from my opinion this is the way of >> introducing such new project in ASF >>>> >>>> Regards >>>> >>>> Gurkan >>>> >>>>> On 17 Jun 2017, at 20:38, Mark Struberg <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hi folks! >>>>> >>>>> We are finished with implementing all CDI-2.0 features and now >> successfully pass the standalone TCK! >>>>> A recent owb-2.0.0-SNAPSHOT is deployed to the Apache Snapshots >> repository [1]. >>>>> This get's deployed via Jenkins each night. >>>>> >>>>> It would be great if you could try it out and give us some feedback! >>>>> We gonna release it somewhen next week. >>>>> >>>>> txs and LieGrue, >>>>> strub >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> [1] https://repository.apache.org/content/groups/snapshots/ >>>> >>> >> >>
