This approach is fine and where I disagree - but as you said one of the beauty of asf is to be allowed to "disagree" - and dislike it a lot is that it is a tomee central vision instead of considering asf as the central point.
To try to illustrate it I'll take a car example: you can optimise the thermic part of an engine, you can optimize the mecanic part, you can optimize the electronic part. You will get the very best of each and some figures for the car (perf/price/autonomy/...). Now if you start thinking car wide you will degrade the mecanic part a bit, degrade the electronic etc...and gain like 30% on the overall perf and price cause you dont look locally but globally. A global optimum is rarely also a local optimum (only in 1 case actually). This is why mecatronic and thinking globally is more efficient than specialties in general and why just speaking of tomee sounds like not going very far to me. Le 22 mars 2018 03:04, "David Blevins" <david.blev...@gmail.com> a écrit : > > On Mar 19, 2018, at 2:45 AM, Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de.INVALID> > wrote: > > > > Let's face it TomEE is mostly an aggregator. A great one, I really love > it - but still. > > [...] > > Folks, you have to stop thinking as TomEE as being the center of the > world. I love TomEE and it's a great aggregator and a great community. > > Everyone is free to have a perspective on what this project is and it's ok > for it not to be the same. It almost never is. It ebbs and it flows and > that is natural. As long as we're clear when we say "TomEE is..." we are > expressing our own opinions, we're ok. > > People tend to think of the project in terms of when they came in. Their > "OpenEJB is x" or "TomEE is x" seems to reflect around the time they got > commit. > > I've put together a timeline of how I've experienced the project. I think > people should dream for more. It's the best part about open source and > what got us even this far. > > If you look at this timeline you see all the growth periods are people > deciding that this is where they wanted to work and they we're the most > flexible on what that was. Even to the point of turning an EJB container > into a Java EE platform. > > ------ > 1999-2001 > > Project is born as an EJB library. Not quite a full EJB implementation. > It is envisioned as an EJB Container with the EJB Server part being > implemented by a full app server. The vision was to strategically not > implement the server part so true app servers would integrate the project > as a library. Resources are abundant, people are everywhere. > > Many people on the project want to implement the server portion and make > the project more than it is. Myself and Richard tell them no. Speaking > for myself, I was a newbie idiot in this phase of the project. > > 2001-2003 > > Funding has dropped from the project, everyone from the original community > but Daniel, Jacek and Alan have gone. I see it now as a full EJB > implementation and perhaps a bit more. The Tomcat integration is born so > Tomcat can have an EJB implementation. The embedded EJB container for > testing is heavily pushed. The full remote protocol is created. The > project is now bigger than its original scope, but only slightly. > Generally, there are no resources and not many people around. > > 2003-2006 > > Geronimo is launched and the project is flooded with new people excited > about Geronimo's future. OpenEJB 1.0 is abandoned for OpenEJB 2.0 which is > a total rewrite of EJB on the Geronimo kernel and module system. Tomcat > integration and embedded EJB concepts are trashed. I still see this as a > project that can live on its own and be more and something I'd love to see > grow in scope. Everyone on Geronimo, but me, sees it as a library for > Geronimo only. At one point I pull the remote EJB code from OpenEJB 1.0 > into OpenEJB 2.0 and people got quietly mad for bringing "legacy" code > forward. The mailing list is dead in these years with most discussion and > decisions made on the Geronimo list. The project is now significantly > smaller than its original scope, everyone is telling me to stop trying to > make it more. There is a lot of fighting in this time frame. > > 2006-2010 > > Work on OpenEJB 3.0 starts and this project regains technical freedom from > Geronimo. Dain Sundstrom leaves Geronimo in this timeframe, wants to make > up for killing OpenEJB 1.0 and puts his weight behind OpenEJB 3.0. OpenEJB > 3.0 is based on OpenEJB 1.0 and the work towards an embeddable EJB > container and a Tomcat integration continue where they left off. There was > some discomfort, skepticism and grumbling in the Geronimo community but > largely ripping out the old EJB container and putting in the new old EJB > container was tolerated. Enjoyed, no, tolerated, yes. It was enjoyed > perhaps a bit later. The embeddable container is a strong feature and > brings new people into the project. > > The project is bigger than any of the scopes it has had previously. > Codebase grows 5x from roughly 50k lines of code to 250k lines of code. > > 2010-2014 > > At this point "OpenEJB" is just shy of a full Java EE implementation and > desire to push it to the next level is high. The Tomcat-OpenEJB integration > is pushed. Momentarily called Tomtom, then finally called TomEE. > Certification happens, the first TomEE releases are made. The project is > renamed and the website referencing OpenEJB is changed to TomEE. The > project enjoys amazing success. Things get busy fast. Geronimo says > nothing about TomEE competing it its space, is supportive and begins using > some additional TomEE/OpenEJB libraries like the jaxb tree. Xbean-finder > is born originally created in OpenEJB/TomEE and moved to Geronimo. > > The project is bigger than any of the scopes it has had previously and the > charter is updated. Codebase grows 2x from roughly 250k to 520k lines of > code. > > 2014-2018 > > User base continues to grow dramatically. Codebase growth slows and lines > of code go from roughly 520k to 580k. Many desire to see the project get > back to its glory state and continue growing. TomEE-Geronimo relationship > appears to be getting complicated again with perspectives being expressed > that limit what TomEE should be and indicate Geronimo is the proper place > for those things to live. There is a lot of fighting. > ------ > > Everything is temporary. We can be anything we want tomorrow. Where we > are now feels a little bit like the 2003-2006 range. Not exactly, but > similar. If that's the case, fantastic, because there was some really good > times afterwards. > > > -David > >
