+1 I'd like to further elaborate why we did not choose to graduate under Geronimo or TomEE.
* TomEE: Johnzon is not only bound to a JavaEE container but could really be used separately, e.g. in CXF. It would be kind of weird if we need to do a Johnzon release in TomEE first, then build CXF to finally be able to release TomEE. * Geronimo is not really active. There are a few parts which are actively maintained, but those are mainly the parts used by TomEE and the specs sub project. The rest has very low activity. What we potentially need for a lot similar projects (BVal, Johnzon, etc) is a kind of 'EE at Apache' umbrella project. That might be a candidate to graduate under. After all, the people contributing to those projects are most times the same anyway ;) But such a project doesn't yet exist. LieGrue, strub > On Tuesday, 5 April 2016, 14:37, Hendrik Dev <hendrikde...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I agree with Justin, there is no real benefit (either for the podling > nor for apache/incubator) when Johnzon stays in the Incubator. > > We have an active, friendly, diverse and responsive community, we had > regular releases, we promote Johnzon [1] and Jira tickets are > typically closed a few days after they we're reported. > > I'd like to keep the vote open till 8th April to continue the > discussion and to reach consensus. > For me graduation under Geronimo makes no sense cause Geronimo is (at > the moment) a really inactive project. > > Thanks > Hendrik > > [1] > https://speakerdeck.com/salyh/johnzon-apaches-upcoming-json-library > held @ApacheCon Europe 2015 > https://www.codecentric.de/2016/01/11/apache-roadshow-24755/ (germany only) > https://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/tag/johnzon/ > > On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 9:42 AM, Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de.invalid> > wrote: >> Good morning! >> >> Of course Johnzon could be bigger. >> And as said before: there are 3 active committers (not 2!) and an active > PMC. >> >> Plus there are at least 2 further people who contributed patches and are on > our watch-list. >> I also believe that we are a really friendly community :) >> >> >> That said I have no problem with either graduating now nor with waiting for > another tick as I'm really confident that we will grow the community pretty > soon. But we will NOT invite people just for the sake of growing. They must > earn > their merit first! >> >> >> LieGrue, >> strub >> >> >> >> >> >>> On Tuesday, 5 April 2016, 8:43, Justin Mclean > <jus...@classsoftware.com> wrote: >>> > Hi, >>> >>> I agree the project doesn’t have a large visible active community but > I’m also >>> not sure what the point of having Johnzon staying in the incubator. > They tick >>> along nicely, they certainly don’t need the incubator to check their > releases >>> and they understand the Apache Way of doing things. What harm would be > done if >>> they did graduate as a TLP vs keeping them in incubation? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Justin >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org >>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org >>> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org >> > > > > -- > Hendrik Saly (salyh, hendrikdev22) > @hendrikdev22 > PGP: 0x22D7F6EC > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
