OpenEJB are a single project and the only liberty we have today is the version (we can't rename openejb-* to tomee-*, it would impact too much people, even for a a major).
Having both versions distinct makes things really hard. So either we rename openejb-* to tomee-* and don't care about users for next major, or we update the version to 5 at least for both products. Note: we can think to the same for the groupId, org.apache.openejb for tomee is weird. Romain Manni-Bucau Twitter: @rmannibucau Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/ LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau 2013/10/25 Kay Wrobel <[email protected]>: > I'm thinking slightly different here. > > I believe that versioning should stick with the actual product's version and > not necessarily align with any bundled technologies or a spec version. I > believe it will confuse people more than anything. > > Look for example at GlassFish. It just keeps incrementing their major > version number whenever there is a major change, such as when they went from > a JEE 6 under Glassfish 3 to JEE 7 under Glassfish 4. > > JBoss AS just keeps incrementing theirs, and they're on JBoss AS 7. > IBM's WebSphere seems to have an odd version numbering using 0.5 increments > of some kind, again not seemingly related to any underlying technology > milestone. See Wikipedia for their version history > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_WebSphere_Application_Server#Version_history>. > > So I think, if this is a major change for TomEE, which I believe it is, > TomEE 2.0 sounds just fine to me. > > > On 10/25/2013 10:15 AM, Karan Malhi wrote: >> >> Aligning TomEE versioning with JavaEE sounds good to me. >> >> >> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 1:37 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau >> <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> a bit too early (since we need 1.6) but thought a bit on next tomee >>> version number. >>> >>> 2 seems natural but it would mean openejb and tomee version would >>> still be different. It would be great to align both to get a better >>> build and remove some hacks to get the version (+ we could use mvn >>> release plugin this way). >>> >>> So TomEE 5 seems the next possible version. >>> >>> That said if we jump so much I think we could align on JavaEE version. >>> >>> So finally my proposal would be to do OpenEJB and TomEE v7. >>> >>> >>> Romain Manni-Bucau >>> Twitter: @rmannibucau >>> Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/ >>> LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau >>> Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau >>> >> >> >
