-1 I would welcome an EOL announcement at the end of the year (with a years notice), but not right now. That's too much pressure. So to make that clear, I would announce EOL on the 1st Jan.18 and EOL is then 1st Jan 2019 - That gives everyone plenty of time to create detailed documentation on the site that targets everyone, and then plenty of time to migrate.
We could make a pre-EOL announcement that details the above plan. An announcement of the planned announcement so to say - That would enable contribution and discussion regarding the EOL effort by the community rather than being a snap decision. Andy. On 18 June 2017 at 20:36, Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]> wrote: > http://tomee.apache.org/developer/migration/tomee-1-to-7.html intends to > solve that issue, we can add any point we hit/encounter > > what else would be a blocker to make 1 EOL in June 2018? > > > Romain Manni-Bucau > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog > <https://blog-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com> | Old Blog > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/ > rmannibucau> | > LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | JavaEE Factory > <https://javaeefactory-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com> > > 2017-06-18 20:17 GMT+02:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]>: > > > > > > > 2017-06-18 19:50 GMT+02:00 Mark Struberg <[email protected]>: > > > >> regarding migration. > >> There are 3 different main use cases afaict. > >> 1.) TomEE standalone server, quite like Tomcat. Using 7.x instead 1.7.x > >> should be a no-brainer without any need to change something within your > >> application > >> > >> 2.) tomee-maven-plugin: change the groupId from org.apache.openejb to > >> org.apache.tomee. Done > >> > > > > > > > > > >> 3.) openejb-core for unit tests. This gets a bit trickier as the various > >> spec APIs from EE7 (tomee) and EE6 (your application) might clash. This > can > >> be solved with an exclude setting in the maven-surefire-plugin > >> > > > > Hmm, just means we upgrade API or you think to something else? > > > > I'll start a page > > > > > >> LieGrue,strub > >> > >> > >> On Sunday, 18 June 2017, 18:51, Romain Manni-Bucau < > >> [email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> > >> 2017-06-18 18:42 GMT+02:00 Jonathan Gallimore < > [email protected] > >> >: > >> > >> > Thanks for the feedback. I think at least some sort of migration guide > >> is > >> > needed as some settings have changed. It would be nice for people to > >> find > >> > out the easy way. Happy to discuss in another thread, but we should > >> agree > >> > when this will appear. > >> > > >> > >> Which settings are you thinking about? > >> > >> > >> > > >> > I also think some visibility on what the EOL statement will actually > >> say (I > >> > guess it would be a paragraph or two) would help community discussion. > >> > > >> > >> No more expectation from the core community (releases etc). So > evolutions > >> as best effort (no guarantee). > >> > >> > >> > > >> > I suspect you won't agree, but I think an EOL is a major > announcement. A > >> > reminder is good if the thread has gone quiet, but I think lazy > >> concensus > >> > is less good, unless several reminders have been sent. You have > stated a > >> > deadline of today, a Sunday - I think some folks may miss that and be > >> too > >> > late. I think mid week would be better to reduce the scope of "missing > >> it". > >> > If we got to mid week, and had a couple more reminders, the lazy > >> concensus > >> > view would seem more reasonable. > >> > > >> > Wouldn't you prefer to make the EOL statement with a few more +1's? > >> > > >> > >> Sure, now i used past releases as prevision of this topic activity > >> plannification and even with 5 reminders i wouldnt have got more so > >> preferring to move forward now. However as said I'm happy to discuss > each > >> points and delay what was just a proposal. > >> > >> > >> > > >> > Jon > >> > > >> > On 18 Jun 2017 5:06 pm, "Romain Manni-Bucau" <[email protected]> > >> > wrote: > >> > > >> > > 2017-06-18 17:36 GMT+02:00 Jonathan Gallimore < > >> > > [email protected]> > >> > > : > >> > > > >> > > > On 18 Jun 2017 3:11 pm, "Romain Manni-Bucau" < > [email protected] > >> > > >> > > > wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > @Jon: please propose a policy then (same as rejecting a release, > >> "no" > >> > is > >> > > > valid only if an alternative is proposed or a string blocker is > >> found > >> > > ;)). > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > I feel I stated my concerns pretty clearly. I didn't just reply -1 > >> and > >> > > walk > >> > > > away, which is what your comment above is suggesting I did. > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > Ok then understand it as i dont read it as an exit path for the > >> project. > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > But, allow me to rephrase anyway - beyond a "drop dead" date, what > >> > > exactly > >> > > > is your policy? > >> > > > > >> > > > How many releases do you see in that time? > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > As much as needed - up to request. Concretely if no user asks for it > >> no > >> > > release, if users ask each month then ~12 (pby more ~10 > realisticly), > >> not > >> > > sure we would do more but sounds way more than enough. It is in > >> > > maintainance anyway so "when needed". > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > What documentation for migration are we going to provide? > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > Any doc needed but have to admit no doc should be needed. This is > >> quite > >> > > parallel to this track so if you see any lack please open a thread > and > >> > > we'll solve it. > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > Do we still intend to fix bugs and/or security issues after that > >> date? > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > No, EOL is exactly that: this soft is no more part of active code > >> after > >> > the > >> > > date. > >> > > > >> > > Side note: already the case since few years actually if you check > our > >> > jira > >> > > :(. > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > Would we continue to accept patches from the community after that > >> date? > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > In best effort mode so no engagement but i dont see why we wouldnt. > >> Maybe > >> > > something unclear: source will not be modified, moved, put read only > >> > > etc...just releases and maintainance is no more expectable from > tomee > >> > > project itself. > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > Your plan basically is to just stop, if I have read it correctly. > I > >> > have > >> > > > concerns about that, which I have stated. > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > I understand but it was to stop *next year* and we need a plan > anyway. > >> > 1.7 > >> > > has several important issues due to the non maintainance it gets > >> since > > >> > 2 > >> > > years. > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > My proposal is simple; answer the questions and concerns about > your > >> > > > proposal and discuss it fully within the community rather than > >> announce > >> > > > something on the website with a single +1. I don't think that is > >> > > > unreasonable. > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > Was not the idea, as stated in the topic it was a discussion but no > >> > > activity in > 10 days requires to take an action, either ack it by > >> > default > >> > > or .... well I don't see any alternative to take the active > feedback. > >> > Happy > >> > > you catch up it now Jon and let's discuss based on previous points - > >> as > >> > > this thread was intended for. > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > Jon > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > Realisticly 1.7 is no more maintained (the cxf coming exceptional > >> > release > >> > > > doesn't help since all the stack is outdated now and coming to EOL > >> and > >> > > > reactivity is too long - we have > 100 bugs we don't backport but > >> > affect > >> > > > 1.7). > >> > > > The upgrade path is really a noop on our side thanks to javaee > >> policy. > >> > If > >> > > > you are thinking about something in particular happy to add it on > >> the > >> > > site. > >> > > > > >> > > > EOL doesn't mean we don't release, we can literally do 120 > releases > >> of > >> > > > 1.7.x if we ack the proposed EOL. > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > Romain Manni-Bucau > >> > > > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog > >> > > > <https://blog-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com> | Old Blog > >> > > > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/ > >> > > > rmannibucau> > >> > > > | > >> > > > LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | JavaEE > Factory > >> > > > <https://javaeefactory-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com> > >> > > > > >> > > > 2017-06-18 15:43 GMT+02:00 Mark Struberg > <[email protected] > >> >: > >> > > > > >> > > > > So probably one more 1.7.x release and then let it fade out? > >> > > > > > >> > > > > LieGrue, > >> > > > > strub > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Am 18.06.2017 um 13:55 schrieb Jonathan Gallimore < > >> > > > > [email protected]>: > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > I object. There are plenty of folks still using 1.7.x, and > we've > >> > > ported > >> > > > > > over various fixes from master without too much trouble. > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > My concern is that those on 1.7.x might be concerned to see it > >> > EOL'd. > >> > > > I'd > >> > > > > > like to see the upgrade path documented and a policy on fixes > >> > applied > >> > > > to > >> > > > > > 1.7.x documented and discussed before an EOL announcement. > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > Jon > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > On 18 Jun 2017 10:51 am, "Romain Manni-Bucau" < > >> > [email protected] > >> > > > > >> > > > > wrote: > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > >> if noone objects before tomorrow i'll update the site with > that > >> > > policy > >> > > > > >> then. > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> Romain Manni-Bucau > >> > > > > >> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog > >> > > > > >> <https://blog-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com> | Old Blog > >> > > > > >> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github < > >> https://github.com/ > >> > > > > >> rmannibucau> | > >> > > > > >> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | JavaEE > >> > Factory > >> > > > > >> <https://javaeefactory-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> 2017-06-17 21:55 GMT+02:00 Mark Struberg > >> > <[email protected] > >> > > >: > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >>> +1. > >> > > > > >>> > >> > > > > >>> 1.x has quite a few design shortcomings and 7.0.x is a > >> backward > >> > > > > >> compatible > >> > > > > >>> drop in replacement. > >> > > > > >>> And 8.x is just around the corner as well... > >> > > > > >>> > >> > > > > >>> LieGrue, > >> > > > > >>> strub > >> > > > > >>> > >> > > > > >>> > >> > > > > >>>> Am 06.06.2017 um 17:58 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau < > >> > > > > >> [email protected] > >> > > > > >>>> : > >> > > > > >>>> > >> > > > > >>>> Hi guys, > >> > > > > >>>> > >> > > > > >>>> it is harder and harder to maintain 1.x branch since almost > >> no > >> > > > library > >> > > > > >> is > >> > > > > >>>> maintained. Request is also decreasing for that version. > >> Tomcat > >> > > will > >> > > > > >> also > >> > > > > >>>> EOL tomcat 8 next year (1.x is on tomcat 7 which still dont > >> have > >> > > an > >> > > > > >>>> official EOL I think but never good to rely on an outdated > >> > > version, > >> > > > > >>> Tomcat > >> > > > > >>>> 7 is N-3 now). > >> > > > > >>>> > >> > > > > >>>> Therefore do we want to plan an EOL for 1.7 that we don't > >> > develop > >> > > > > >> anymore > >> > > > > >>>> anyway? What about june next year? Should let people more > >> than > >> > > > enough > >> > > > > >>> time > >> > > > > >>>> to migrate to TomEE 7. > >> > > > > >>>> > >> > > > > >>>> wdyt? > >> > > > > >>>> > >> > > > > >>>> Romain Manni-Bucau > >> > > > > >>>> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog > >> > > > > >>>> <https://blog-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com> | Old Blog > >> > > > > >>>> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github < > >> > https://github.com/ > >> > > > > >>> rmannibucau> | > >> > > > > >>>> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | > JavaEE > >> > > Factory > >> > > > > >>>> <https://javaeefactory-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com> > >> > > > > >>> > >> > > > > >>> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > > -- Andy Gumbrecht https://twitter.com/AndyGeeDe http://www.tomitribe.com
