Oh yes, definitely agree on side effects. In the roadmap, i did not mentioned precisely the numbers. I'm pretty sure for the 1.6.0.1 and the 1.7.0 because it's done.
Then, it's not a short term. But I like to start before June. Of course and as you mentioned it depends how far and how much we can work on other projects. Let's start small with BVal. Then, OpenWebBeans should be ok and we can finish with OpenJPA. JLouis 2014-04-07 22:50 GMT+02:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]>: > why I'm not so hppy to get 2.0 now is we'll surely fork at a point > with 1.7.x branch. Can be a lot short term since other projects are > really not ready to be integrated yet. I expect few months before > being able to do it constructively. Can be done in parallel surely but > not breaking tomee is an important challenge. We need to avoid what we > did for 1.0.0 where trunk was broken for a while and in between > releases/snapshoting was really hard...can also mean we want to use a > real git repo now to be able to switch faster between > versions/branches (today switching between versions/branches is really > slow if you don't use vim). > Romain Manni-Bucau > Twitter: @rmannibucau > Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/ > LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau > Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau > > > > 2014-04-07 22:42 GMT+02:00 Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <[email protected]>: > > 1.6.1: totally opened question, much more for users in order to have a > > better compatibility insurance ;-) Not sure going to 1.7.0 in that scope > is > > more risky, but the question makes sense at least, whatever the result > is. > > > > 2.0: right, having a branch would help us investigate and try to create > > patch for other projects, like you mentioned. Of course to integrate all > > Java EE 7 compatible projects we need at least to have something. But a > > branch allow us, like in the past to fork locally, patch to reverse back > to > > the community. It's more for OpenJPA, BVal and MyFaces we don't have that > > much people involved. > > > > The in between step is ok for me, if that makes sense. > > > > Thanks for the accurate feedback > > JLouis > > > > > > 2014-04-07 22:29 GMT+02:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]>: > > > >> +1 for 1.6.0.1 > >> > >> +1 for 1.7.0 with java 8 support (side not is all patches are applied > >> on respectives trunk since today so we can "just" fork but dont think > >> we need) when possible (openjpa is on the red path so we should just > >> ping them, otherwise releases are here or can be here in less than a > >> week) > >> > >> 1.6.1 is useless IMO > >> > >> 2.0 when 1.7 is released is possible but the main point about it is > >> IMO we should make other project released first (bval is ready, owb > >> needs some work) otherwise we'll don't get much benefit to use their > >> snapshots but a lot of drawbacks (+ bval snapshot is not really here > >> actually). So I'd start JavaEE 7 by other project and would hack it up > >> in tomee when ready to integrate sthg (bval seems the first real > >> candidate). This would allow a last fixes release before JavaEE 7 is > >> needed or just wouldn't have had any drawback if not. A in between > >> step would be to pass trunk on java 7 and drop java 6 support without > >> adding EE 7 feature (a mandatory first step btw). wdyt? > >> > >> Romain Manni-Bucau > >> Twitter: @rmannibucau > >> Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/ > >> LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau > >> Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau > >> > >> > >> > >> 2014-04-07 21:59 GMT+02:00 Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <[email protected]>: > >> > Hi devs, > >> > > >> > now that the security maintenance release 1.6.0.1 is ongoing, time to > >> look > >> > in the upcoming months. Here are some thoughts on a possible roadmap. > >> > > >> > - Apache TomEE 1.6.0.1 (now) > >> > Security maintenance release 1.6.0.1 --> Cf. previous mails on the > >> dev@list. > >> > > >> > - Apache TomEE 1.7.0 (next week, right after the 1.6.0.1) > >> > This is a feature full release with some major parts: Java 8 support > >> (only > >> > 2 weeks after the GA, Apache TomEE plume (Apache TomEE Plus + Mojora + > >> > EclipseLink) to name a few. > >> > We are almost ready to release, but some dependencies need to be > upgraded > >> > (CXF, XBean, OpenJPA, OpenWebBeans). > >> > We can do that by applying the patch internally on our trunk and > deliver > >> > our own binaries. > >> > The good point of such an approach is that we can gather as many > feedback > >> > as possible quickly and then we have room to spread the word over > other > >> > communities. > >> > > >> > - Apache TomEE 1.6.1 (??) > >> > That releas could be basically the current trunk, without java 8 > support > >> > and without the plume distro. > >> > WDYT? > >> > Any interest on the community side? > >> > If yes, we could do this one right after the 1.7.0. > >> > > >> > - Apache TomEE 2.0 branches > >> > One month after the 1.7.0 we could start the 2.0 branch to target Java > >> EE 7. > >> > That branch gonna be the new trunk and we'll keep active branches for > 1.6 > >> > and 1.7. > >> > That means that all fixes mergeable to those branches must be done on > the > >> > flow. > >> > > >> > WDYT? > >> > Any feedback welcome. > >> > > >> > -- > >> > Jean-Louis > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Jean-Louis > -- Jean-Louis
