Totally agree with you Mark. My initial response was polite as usual, I acknowledged my mistake and reverted quickly and explained my intention. Then comes the all too familiar b... slap, another one - Jean-Louis response is the best one, but that also can misfire - "What are you 'f'ing doing with my car?", will instantly change the tone and you end up resenting the fact you even considered washing it. My problem is I never slap first, but I really don't respond well when I get one - It's the old soldier in me I guess.

I take the premise, you're standing in a bar. I'm an extremely happy drinker, but don't ask me "What you lookin at?" or spill my beer - In fact, if you do, my first response is "Excuse me?" (Diplomacy), it's the "I said, what are you looking at?" that tips the balance for me. I make an equal effort to be courteous and not spill anyone else's beer in a bar. If I keep getting my beer spilt then as Mark points out, find another pub. Only one choice for me, as I really don't want to fight. That doesn't mean I can't.


On 13/02/18 10:25, Mark Struberg wrote:
It's our duty as PMC members to review committs. And of course a commit with 
the comment 'starting a thing which was decided not to be done' should spark 
EVERYONES curiosity.

All the PMC members at TomEE and Geronimo have been aware of the discussions 
and nobody said anything against putting the reusable parts at Geronimo. Au 
contraire it was widely agreed. Both the Geronimo PMC and also the TomEE PMC 
have been discussing this for months.

Romain and I spent lots of time to find a viable compromise which is in the 
best interest of the broader communities. This included the option of moving 
the existing Geronimo parts to TomEE. Actually whether those parts are hosted 
at TomEE or Geronimo is really a minor point. After all the _active_ people are 
the same in both projects anyway.

Andy made his intent clear now, I applogized. And I don't feel bad for it. 
Because it was very important to clarify the situation.


Am 13.02.2018 um 09:52 schrieb Jean-Louis Monteiro <>:

Morning Mark,

I appreciate the feedback, but I disagree.

Adding an @Ignore on a test failing does not fix the issue (either the test
or the code)
Putting a napkin over some c... does not clean it up.

This is not the first time it happens, so I'd rather prefer the community
to vent, put the problems on the table so we can tackle them, instead of
pretending the problem is solved and in one month from now, we are in the
same position.

I do not plan to put fuel on the fire.

I'm suggesting that instead of shooting at the daughter and therefor not
getting any chance to know it was a present, one should first ask
"My sweet heart, why do you have the keys of the car?"
"What do you plan to do with them?"

I was trying to add some guidance to your good example of the daughter and
her father.

You are a father, so am I.

Hope it helps.

Jean-Louis Monteiro

On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 9:05 AM, Mark Struberg <>

Please all stop putting fuel into the fire.


Am 13.02.2018 um 08:48 schrieb Jean-Louis Monteiro <>:
Instead of shooting to someone or start arguing. Simply asking would take
all misunderstand off and avoid this disgusting mess.

Le 13 févr. 2018 08:33, "Mark Struberg" <> a
écrit :

+1  words - and especially brief once as emails - are just a mapping
the reality to some 'transport mechanism' (Claude Shannon sender
And of course each 'map' is a huge simplification from the reality and
thus prone to be misinterpreted.

The important part here is that those clashes bring up some difference
And yes, I also think this has nothing to do with immature or childish.
are all just passionate.
So the first very important step is to identify the pain point.

For Romain and me, etc is to avoid duplication of work which already got
done in other ASF projects.
And to not have those modules hardcoded bound to the TomEE Application
Server but to be reusable for other projects.
Please note that I'm talking about the Appliation Server only and not
about the TomEE project as governance body.

I also had an important lesson in the 90s:

If you have a problem
1.) solve it
2.) if you cannot solve it, live with it
3.) if you cannot live with it, leave it.

More generally:
There are some points which totally doesn't matter to someone.
There are other points which we would love to see a certain outcome, but
we would also perfectly accept a compromise.
And is also a category of points where we simply cannot live with a
compromise. Or where we would simply stop being part of it.

In the current situation it's pretty easy. NONE of the cases fits.
It was simply a misunderstanding.
Andy wanted to commit samples and integrate mp-config to TomEE.
This is perfectly fine, but the commit comment and the location was very
easy to get misinterpreted.
And that's exactly what happens.

That's like you forbid your daughter to use your car and then she
your keys.
You shout at her, but only after she bursts out in tears you find out
she only wanted to wash your car as a birthday present...

And now back to work pretty please ;)


Am 13.02.2018 um 07:38 schrieb dsh <>:


I followed what David calls "incidents" or "childish" quite closely in
past. Why? Cause such situations are quite familiar to me. I've been
thousands of times and what I can tell for granted is that non of these
situations are neither "incidents" nor "childish".

As a matter of fact each individual has a certain believe system on one
hand and on the other hand lives on his/her own island. The latter I
an explanation for the fact that we all have our own perception of what
think reality is and it usually isn't congruent with the perception of
others. If either your believe systems are conflicting or your
of what you think is reality are clashing, you usually have such

That said I learned the hard way that usually you are not fighting,
this case, about backed out code but it's usually something
What makes me wondering especially if I think about all the Twitter and
Facebook posts where I see you guys hanging out together is, that such,
I suspect it inter-personal conflicts, erupt on the mailing list or
code commits, where my naive understanding is, that you could talk
face-to-face to nail down what really drives you crazy.

What I learned is that it doesn't quite help, neither from the
of somebody that is involved, nor from the perspective of somebody who
is a
leader to finger point or to call out individuals. In the end you
this into a mess and thus you have to fix it TOGETHER. If necessary you
could even pull in a coach from outside. I for myself applied for a
back in 2015. It's not a silver bullet and does not fix everything you
screwed up in the past but it sometimes helps to have somebody with a
neutral view and another opinion.

In the end my perception of reality on my little island is that you all
bond a very strong team. I saw and worked with teams that were no real
in the end. In your case I don't have such a perception and thus I
that you get this sorted out in a sustainable manner. Take it as a


On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 6:33 AM, David Blevins <>

Ok, community, we have to have another quick talk and then hopefully
can go back to being awesome.

This thread got very negative and bares a striking resemblance to the
"Suffocating Development Environment" thread from the June 27th
Yes, I've written about it enough times in the board reports that I
the date memorized.  What I've written is mostly positive and been
by the board for our handling of a hard situation.  You're all making
liar out of me. :)

I was delicate in the first situation, but now I have to be a bit more

In the June 27th incident we had Andy committing code, Romain
it, the two exchanging insults for one hour till Andy quit complaining
he's working in his spare time implies Romain is killing the project.
joins attempting to take some heat off of Romain.  Jon joins
be as neutral as possible.  In the end both Mark and Jon apologize.
code stays reverted.

In this incident Andy committed code. Mark and Romain begin arguing.
Insults are exchanged for one hour till Andy quits complaining that
working in his spare time and implies Romain is killing the project.
joins attempting to be as neutral as possible.  In the end both Mark
Jon apologize.  Andy's code stays reverted.  This time it's all

Am I the only one to notice a pattern?  That pattern is not one
fault.  The pattern is we are behaving like children.

This will not get better if each of us is expecting the other guy to
change.  If your only response to this email is find flaws in others,
guarantee nothing will get better.

Mark, you got there in the end which is great.  You pointed out
you could have done better and something Andy could do better.  That's
right pattern.  People are much more willing to accept feedback when
see you're also willing to accept it.

We need to get there sooner next time and we need more than one person
doing it.

So with all that said, how do we turn this into an awesome learning
experience that makes us stronger?


On Feb 12, 2018, at 11:22 AM, Andy Gumbrecht <
Added project stubs:

On 05/02/18 11:17, Jean-Louis Monteiro wrote:

Ok thanks guys.
@Rudy, you are most welcome :)

Jean-Louis Monteiro

On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 11:39 AM, Rudy De Busscher <>

I think it is a very important spec, also for non-microprofile
implementations as it can enhance the interoperability of all
I'm also very interested in the implementation (and want to help a
it also :) )


On 2 February 2018 at 11:23, Mark Struberg

To clarify this even further:
The Geronimo Server is now officially dead.
But the Geronimo project is not. It alredy contains quite a few
parts which are reused in many ASF projects and also outside.
Examples is the geronimo-transaction-manager, geronimo-javamail,
geronimo-config, xbean-finder, etc

Of course it would probably make sense to fold those 2 projects
as already discussed in the past.
I'm still all open to it, but I have an important criterium to
If we move those portable parts to TomEE, then this would mean
would become an 'Umbrella project'.
And further that we would need a new name for those portable
They would effectively be mainatained by the TomEE community
has a
big overlap with Geronimo anyway) but those parts must clearly be
recognized separately from TomEE.

Otherwise people will assume that those parts only work within
TomEE -
where in reality they would even work on WildFly or Liberty, etc.
even a
naked Tomcat.
Got me?

We might e.g. brand them as 'TomEE Geronimo Spare Parts

PS: I'd also love to keep the org.apache.geronimo package name to
backward compatibility.

Am 02.02.2018 um 11:08 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <

2018-02-02 11:05 GMT+01:00 Otávio Gonçalves de Santana <>:

Guys, I have a question:

Why not a project to each implementation?

this is the case but geronimo is used as an umbrella project.

This way I can use just a specific if I want also.

exactly the goal and user usage AFAIK ;)

long story short: we learnt from the past errors and since always
people work on these projects it is better to not split it
communities since
it leads to a lot of efforts for these people. Having a single
project with N subprojects reduces the administrative work etc
the projects productivity.

On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 7:44 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <>

Hi JL,

Microprofile apache effort is hosted in geronimo and John
about it I think. Would probably saner to keep it all at the
the foundation.

Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau <> |  Blog
<> | Old Blog
<> | Github <
rmannibucau> |
LinkedIn <> | Book

2018-02-02 9:39 GMT+01:00 Jean-Louis Monteiro <

Hi all,

I was wondering if we could have the Microprofile JWT
What do you think?

I was reading the spec and I'd like to contribute that in.


Jean-Louis Monteiro

Andy Gumbrecht


Andy Gumbrecht


Reply via email to