Romain,

s/openejb/tomee/ +1
but the version synchronization with Java EE specification. TomEE
7.x.x, TomEE 8.x.x and beyond.


On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 12:04 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Honestly I think we can't do anything else than 2.0 but s/openejb/tomee/
> and s/5.x/2.x/ will work if we move to org.apache.tomee.
>
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Tomitriber
> <http://www.tomitribe.com>
>
> 2015-03-05 16:02 GMT+01:00 Mark Struberg <[email protected]>:
>
>> I like JLouis original proposal regarding aligning it with the EE versions.
>>
>> OpenEJB was EJB centric. Thus it was very closely bound to EJB spec
>> versions.
>> TomEE is EE umbrella centric. Thus it is closely bound to the EE umbrella
>> spec version
>>
>> TomEE-1.7.x -> TomEE-6.0.x
>> TomEE-2.0 -> TomEE-7.x
>>
>> That way it is really easy for users to know what they get!
>>
>> Maybe we let 1.7.x as it is, but we should really go for TomEE-7.0.0
>> instead of 2.0
>>
>> LieGrue,
>> strub
>>
>>
>> > Am 05.01.2015 um 20:17 schrieb Jean-Louis Monteiro <
>> [email protected]>:
>> >
>> > Definitely useful thoughts Jon.
>> > Thx for sharing.
>> >
>> > --
>> > Jean-Louis Monteiro
>> > http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
>> > http://www.tomitribe.com
>> >
>> > On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 4:18 PM, Jonathan Gallimore <
>> > [email protected]> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Just wanted to chip in with my $0.02... I'll try not to flame anyone or
>> >> propose anything too controversial :).
>> >>
>> >> What are the release tools in question - is this the Maven Release
>> plugin
>> >> or a TomEE specific tool (I'm thinking along the lines of:
>> >>
>> >>
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomee/sandbox/release-tools/src/main/java/org/apache/openejb/tools/release/Release.java
>> >> )?
>> >> I ask as I'm wondering whether improving / fixing the tool is good
>> option?
>> >>
>> >> That said, I have no objection to aligning the TomEE and OpenEJB
>> numbers.
>> >> My personal opinion is that I'd avoid going back numerically (might be
>> >> perceived as a step back, and we previously had OpenEJB 2 which looked
>> >> quite different to OpenEJB >= 3 if I remember correctly). Jumping both
>> to a
>> >> version 5 might look like a substantial update for TomEE that would
>> require
>> >> some explanation. I'm less keen on aligning to the Tomcat version, but
>> >> aligning to the Java EE version could make it quite simple. So, TomEE
>> 1.7.x
>> >> / OpenEJB 4.7.x would become TomEE/OpenEJB 6.x and TomEE 2.0 / OpenEJB
>> 5.0
>> >> would becoming TomEE/OpenEJB 7.0.
>> >>
>> >> Personally I'm not in favour of splitting the release cycles of OpenEJB
>> and
>> >> TomEE - I think splitting them might create more work in managing
>> >> dependencies, and might introduce some confusion between what versions
>> of
>> >> OpenEJB and TomEE are compatible with each other. I would also be
>> concerned
>> >> that there might be even more overhead in trying to actually do the
>> >> releases than there is now, as we'd effectively have to do a release for
>> >> OpenEJB and another for TomEE, with one being dependent on the other.
>> >>
>> >> Hope that these are useful thoughts.
>> >>
>> >> Jon
>> >>
>> >> On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 12:00 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> [email protected]
>> >>>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> We  can for sure downgrade openejb since we would use org.apache.tomee
>> as
>> >>> groupid and finally be almost consistent - what we are not since tomee
>> is
>> >>> the openejb name.
>> >>>
>> >>> We can do it for tomee 2. We can even rename all openejb artifacts to
>> >> tomee
>> >>> and assume we cant split both.
>> >>> Le 3 janv. 2015 11:06, "Jean-Louis Monteiro" <[email protected]
>> >
>> >> a
>> >>> écrit :
>> >>>
>> >>>> I do mainly agree on the result and the consequences to have 2
>> >> different
>> >>>> versions in the same tree.
>> >>>> The best would have been to have OpenEJB as a separate subproject with
>> >>> its
>> >>>> own lifecycle and versioning and to use it in TomEE like any other dep
>> >>>> (openjpa, cxf to name a few).
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Because usually we update in both sides OpenEJB and TomEE, we decided
>> >> to
>> >>>> stick with one tree only containing TomEE, the Maven plugin, OpenEJB,
>> >> etc
>> >>>> with the consequences you mentioned Andy. It definitely has some
>> >> benefits
>> >>>> but yes the drawbacks are heavy as well.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> That said, I'm wondering if OpenEJB and TomEE at least have a
>> different
>> >>>> lifecycle. If not, then at least they should have the same version in
>> >> the
>> >>>> same tree.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> The problem I can see.
>> >>>> - bumping TomEE version to 4.x for example is quite "dangerous". TomEE
>> >> by
>> >>>> itself is pretty young even if most of the codebase is old. Switching
>> >>> from
>> >>>> 1.x to 4.x without anything in the middle is doable but hard to argue
>> >>>> considering we only released less than 10 TomEE versions.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> - using tomcat versioning, I'm -1 for this. Same drawbacks as previous
>> >>> and
>> >>>> no real benefits. We could use the Java EE web profile versions or
>> Java
>> >>> EE
>> >>>> versions, like TomEE 6.x for Java EE 6 Web Profile, TomEE 7.x for Java
>> >>> EE 7
>> >>>> Web Profile, etc
>> >>>>
>> >>>> - downgrading OpenEJB version is even more complicated in my opinion
>> >> and
>> >>> as
>> >>>> we kept the same groupId / artifactId, it can be a big Maven hell.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> What's "the less worst" solution we could use?
>> >>>> Considering OpenEJB and TomEE have their own lifecycle, I'd then keep
>> >> the
>> >>>> versions and split the source tree and the releases
>> >>>> Considering OpenEJB and TomEE have different lifecycle, I'd go with
>> the
>> >>>> same versioning, probably using OpenEJB versions or better EE version.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> --
>> >>>> Jean-Louis Monteiro
>> >>>> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
>> >>>> http://www.tomitribe.com
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 10:46 AM, Andy Gumbrecht <
>> >>> [email protected]>
>> >>>> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> I know this is a flamed subject, but here goes.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> A major problem on release is the double barrelled version of OpenEJB
>> >>> 4.x
>> >>>>> and TomEE 1.x and  5.x / 2.x. This makes using release tools
>> >> virtually
>> >>>>> impossible and the whole process has to have manual interaction. We
>> >>> shoot
>> >>>>> ourselves in the foot with this one every time.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> I know project separation is a no go area for some, so another option
>> >>>>> would be to get versions aligned. Also a huge point of contention.
>> >> The
>> >>>>> issue is the version to use?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> So this is just to throw a rabbit into the lions den - How about
>> >>> aligning
>> >>>>> with the underlying Tomcat major version, something like
>> >> TomEE/OpenEJB
>> >>>> 7.x
>> >>>>> for Tomcat 7.x and 8.x for Tomcat 8?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Andy.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> --
>> >>>>>  Andy Gumbrecht
>> >>>>>  https://twitter.com/AndyGeeDe
>> >>>>>  http://www.tomitribe.com
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>>
>>



-- 
Best regard,
Daniel Cunha (soro)

Reply via email to