well something which is doable today (actually already "demo" it on current version) is batchee which is now released and usable.
Trying so summarize: 1) jbatch -> just to import 2) websocket -> out of the box 3) CDI -> OWB to hack before integrating 4) BVal -> model to build in tomee, cdi integration to rework a bit (needs to exclude bval scanning) but work startable 6) jaxws/jaxrs -> cxf almost done but not yet and api not yet the right one last time i looked so blocking 7) openjpa and amq -> not yet started 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 22:54 GMT+02:00 Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <[email protected]>: > 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
