Hmm, Not sure Tomcat guys wants it. Don't forget OpenEJB needs to run in standalone without Tomcat. Tomcat needs to stay naked too for a bunch of cases.
Merging both in a single trunk would be hard too since build techno and code "rules" are really different. BTW would be interesting to get Tomcat dev feedback on it... 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]>: > Of course, another, more krass idea would be to merge TomEE and Tomcat and > make it one Java EE 7 compliant Tomcat server. There's more brand > recognition in Tomcat and elevating IT to Java EE Full profile would have a > huge impact on the project, guaranteed. > > > On 10/25/2013 10:54 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: >> >> Hmm, would make using mvn-release-plugin harder, if possible we need >> to keep a.b.c pattern. >> >> Maybe we can just do a poll and get rid of openejb now... >> 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]>: >>> >>> Another thought I would like to throw out there, since TomEE and Tomcat >>> are >>> directly related, would be to align the version of TomEE with the shipped >>> version of Tomcat + some denominator for the underlying tech version of >>> openejb, since that is a driving factor of TomEE. >>> >>> That would make it something like TomEE 7.0.42-4.6.0. >>> >>> >>> On 10/25/2013 10:37 AM, Kay Wrobel wrote: >>>> >>>> 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 >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >
