Re: tomee site slogan

[David Jencks]

I agree with Ivan.

David Jencks

> On Apr 27, 2018, at 1:59 PM, Ivan Junckes Filho  wrote:
> 
> I agree with Mark and +1 to Dani's description.
> 
> On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 5:34 PM, Mark Struberg 
> wrote:
> 
>> Also fine.
>> It's just the 'Remote EE Server' which is kind of weird ;)
>> 
>> LieGrue,
>> strub
>> 
>>> Am 27.04.2018 um 22:32 schrieb Daniel Cunha :
>>> 
>>> I'll prefer something like:
>>> "The Embedded or Standalone Enterprise Tomcat Server"
>>> 
>>> 2018-04-27 17:19 GMT-03:00 Mark Struberg :
>>> 
 Hi folks!
 
 I really like the new TomEE site.
 
 Just one thing which we might want to improve:
 The main slogan currently says
 "The Embedded or Remote EE Application Server"
 
 Trust me, reading "Remote EE Application Server" doesn't give people a
 good feeling ;)
 This reminds me a bit too much about Remote EJBs...
 
 
 What about the following:
 "The Embedded or Standalone Tomcat Server on Enterprise Stereoides"
 
 ?
 
 LieGrue,
 strub
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Daniel "soro" Cunha
>>> https://twitter.com/dvlc_
>> 
>> 

Re: tomee site slogan

[Ivan Junckes Filho]

I agree with Mark and +1 to Dani's description.

On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 5:34 PM, Mark Struberg 
wrote:

> Also fine.
> It's just the 'Remote EE Server' which is kind of weird ;)
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
> > Am 27.04.2018 um 22:32 schrieb Daniel Cunha :
> >
> > I'll prefer something like:
> > "The Embedded or Standalone Enterprise Tomcat Server"
> >
> > 2018-04-27 17:19 GMT-03:00 Mark Struberg :
> >
> >> Hi folks!
> >>
> >> I really like the new TomEE site.
> >>
> >> Just one thing which we might want to improve:
> >> The main slogan currently says
> >> "The Embedded or Remote EE Application Server"
> >>
> >> Trust me, reading "Remote EE Application Server" doesn't give people a
> >> good feeling ;)
> >> This reminds me a bit too much about Remote EJBs...
> >>
> >>
> >> What about the following:
> >> "The Embedded or Standalone Tomcat Server on Enterprise Stereoides"
> >>
> >> ?
> >>
> >> LieGrue,
> >> strub
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Daniel "soro" Cunha
> > https://twitter.com/dvlc_
>
>

Re: tomee site slogan

[Mark Struberg]

Also fine.
It's just the 'Remote EE Server' which is kind of weird ;)

LieGrue,
strub

> Am 27.04.2018 um 22:32 schrieb Daniel Cunha :
> 
> I'll prefer something like:
> "The Embedded or Standalone Enterprise Tomcat Server"
> 
> 2018-04-27 17:19 GMT-03:00 Mark Struberg :
> 
>> Hi folks!
>> 
>> I really like the new TomEE site.
>> 
>> Just one thing which we might want to improve:
>> The main slogan currently says
>> "The Embedded or Remote EE Application Server"
>> 
>> Trust me, reading "Remote EE Application Server" doesn't give people a
>> good feeling ;)
>> This reminds me a bit too much about Remote EJBs...
>> 
>> 
>> What about the following:
>> "The Embedded or Standalone Tomcat Server on Enterprise Stereoides"
>> 
>> ?
>> 
>> LieGrue,
>> strub
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Daniel "soro" Cunha
> https://twitter.com/dvlc_

Re: tomee site slogan

[Daniel Cunha]

I'll prefer something like:
"The Embedded or Standalone Enterprise Tomcat Server"

2018-04-27 17:19 GMT-03:00 Mark Struberg :

> Hi folks!
>
> I really like the new TomEE site.
>
> Just one thing which we might want to improve:
> The main slogan currently says
> "The Embedded or Remote EE Application Server"
>
> Trust me, reading "Remote EE Application Server" doesn't give people a
> good feeling ;)
> This reminds me a bit too much about Remote EJBs...
>
>
> What about the following:
> "The Embedded or Standalone Tomcat Server on Enterprise Stereoides"
>
> ?
>
> LieGrue,
> strub




-- 
Daniel "soro" Cunha
https://twitter.com/dvlc_

tomee site slogan

[Mark Struberg]

Hi folks!

I really like the new TomEE site. 

Just one thing which we might want to improve:
The main slogan currently says 
"The Embedded or Remote EE Application Server"

Trust me, reading "Remote EE Application Server" doesn't give people a good 
feeling ;)
This reminds me a bit too much about Remote EJBs...


What about the following:
"The Embedded or Standalone Tomcat Server on Enterprise Stereoides"

?

LieGrue,
strub

Re: TomEE-7.0.5 work

[Romain Manni-Bucau]

We are working with Mark on a release train soon, johnzon would be part of
it probably.
An OWB release is needed too AFAIK and is on its way.


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


2018-04-27 14:43 GMT+02:00 Alex The Rocker :

> Hello TomEE developers,
>
> I was away for a while, and I'm a bit lost on the TomEE 7.0.5 upcoming
> release plans:
> - Jon did a great job with PR for upcoming Johnzon 1.0.1, but as far
> as I see, Johnzon 1.0.1 is still not released
> - What else would prevent TomEE 7.0.5 from being released?
>
> As usual I volunteer for running heavy tests on any preview...
>
> Best regards,
> Alexandre
>
>
> 2018-04-16 8:25 GMT+02:00 Romain Manni-Bucau :
> > It is the fix, originally alternative=true was a very secured impl cause
> > even with a poorly setup test it was passing but it was wrong. Maybe it
> is
> > worth a ticket to have it in the changelog but no doubt we are good now.
> >
> > Le 16 avr. 2018 07:41, "Mark Struberg"  a
> écrit :
> >
> >> Hi jon!
> >>
> >> Most probably has to do with fixing OWB-1209.
> >>
> >> A custom Bean which is an @Alternative also must be enabled via
> beans.xml
> >> as per the spec :(
> >>
> >> I know this is not convenient, but thats what the spec says.
> >> From CDI-2.0 onwards one can add the Prioritized interface and add a
> >> priority n a programmatic way.
> >>
> >> LieGrue,
> >> Strub
> >>
> >> > Am 15.04.2018 um 23:36 schrieb Jonathan Gallimore <
> >> jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com>:
> >> >
> >> > On the openejb-mockito test failure - forget my previous emails -
> setting
> >> > the MockBean to not be an AlternativeBean seems to do the trick.
> Pushed.
> >> > Lets see what we get from the CI now.
> >> >
> >> > Cheers
> >> >
> >> > Jon
> >> >
> >> > On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 9:43 PM, Jonathan Gallimore <
> >> > jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> OK, I'm not sure which commit causes that test failure, but this
> commit
> >> is
> >> >> ok: https://github.com/apache/openwebbeans/commit/
> >> >> 4b7259a1f7c8c0d65736f753df9e6a43a262ed96. Will try and pin it down.
> >> >>
> >> >> In other news - Johnzon patch submitted, and discussion opened on the
> >> >> Johnzon dev@ mailing list. Will keep this thread posted on progress.
> >> >>
> >> >> Jon
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 9:03 PM, Jonathan Gallimore <
> >> >> jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> Thanks all!
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I have looked at the test failures on the CI. The bval-embedded
> tests
> >> >>> should be ok now - the other failures were in the openejb-mockito
> >> module,
> >> >>> and I think they relate to this change in OWB:
> >> https://github.com/apache
> >> >>> /openwebbeans/commit/89c18915afc2173ec1c5478ca6dc09ecce322d2a
> >> >>>
> >> >>> To be honest, I don't know where to start looking at this one, can
> >> anyone
> >> >>> help? I'd appreciate any learning I can do in the process. In
> essence,
> >> >>> we're seeing this:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Caused by: javax.enterprise.inject.UnsatisfiedResolutionException:
> Api
> >> >>> type [org.apache.openejb.mockito.Hello] is not found with the
> >> qualifiers
> >> >>> Qualifiers: [@javax.enterprise.inject.Default()]
> >> >>> for injection into Field Injection Point, field name :  helloCdi,
> Bean
> >> >>> Owner : [Facade, WebBeansType:ENTERPRISE, Name:null, API
> >> >>> Types:[org.apache.openejb.mockito.Facade,java.lang.Object],
> >> >>> Qualifiers:[javax.enterprise.inject.Default,javax.
> >> enterprise.inject.Any]]
> >> >>> at org.apache.webbeans.util.InjectionExceptionUtil.throwUnsatis
> >> >>> fiedResolutionException(InjectionExceptionUtil.java:65)
> >> >>> at org.apache.webbeans.container.InjectionResolver.checkInjecti
> >> >>> onPoint(InjectionResolver.java:234)
> >> >>> at org.apache.webbeans.container.BeanManagerImpl.validate(BeanM
> >> >>> anagerImpl.java:1209)
> >> >>> at org.apache.webbeans.util.WebBeansUtil.validate(
> >> WebBeansUtil.java:1709)
> >> >>> at org.apache.webbeans.config.BeansDeployer.validate(BeansDeplo
> >> >>> yer.java:924)
> >> >>> at org.apache.webbeans.config.BeansDeployer.validateInjectionPo
> >> >>> ints(BeansDeployer.java:835)
> >> >>> at org.apache.webbeans.config.BeansDeployer.deploy(BeansDeploye
> >> >>> r.java:318)
> >> >>> ... 24 more
> >> >>>
> >> >>> As far as I can see the extension adds the necessary stuff
> >> >>> on javax.enterprise.inject.spi.AfterBeanDiscovery here:
> >> >>> https://github.com/apache/tomee/blob/master/utils/
> >> >>> openejb-mockito/src/main/java/org/apache/openejb/mockito/
> >> >>> MockitoExtension.java#L53
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I'll a build without that change to a) 

Re: TomEE-7.0.5 work

[Alex The Rocker]

Hello TomEE developers,

I was away for a while, and I'm a bit lost on the TomEE 7.0.5 upcoming
release plans:
- Jon did a great job with PR for upcoming Johnzon 1.0.1, but as far
as I see, Johnzon 1.0.1 is still not released
- What else would prevent TomEE 7.0.5 from being released?

As usual I volunteer for running heavy tests on any preview...

Best regards,
Alexandre


2018-04-16 8:25 GMT+02:00 Romain Manni-Bucau :
> It is the fix, originally alternative=true was a very secured impl cause
> even with a poorly setup test it was passing but it was wrong. Maybe it is
> worth a ticket to have it in the changelog but no doubt we are good now.
>
> Le 16 avr. 2018 07:41, "Mark Struberg"  a écrit :
>
>> Hi jon!
>>
>> Most probably has to do with fixing OWB-1209.
>>
>> A custom Bean which is an @Alternative also must be enabled via beans.xml
>> as per the spec :(
>>
>> I know this is not convenient, but thats what the spec says.
>> From CDI-2.0 onwards one can add the Prioritized interface and add a
>> priority n a programmatic way.
>>
>> LieGrue,
>> Strub
>>
>> > Am 15.04.2018 um 23:36 schrieb Jonathan Gallimore <
>> jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com>:
>> >
>> > On the openejb-mockito test failure - forget my previous emails - setting
>> > the MockBean to not be an AlternativeBean seems to do the trick. Pushed.
>> > Lets see what we get from the CI now.
>> >
>> > Cheers
>> >
>> > Jon
>> >
>> > On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 9:43 PM, Jonathan Gallimore <
>> > jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> OK, I'm not sure which commit causes that test failure, but this commit
>> is
>> >> ok: https://github.com/apache/openwebbeans/commit/
>> >> 4b7259a1f7c8c0d65736f753df9e6a43a262ed96. Will try and pin it down.
>> >>
>> >> In other news - Johnzon patch submitted, and discussion opened on the
>> >> Johnzon dev@ mailing list. Will keep this thread posted on progress.
>> >>
>> >> Jon
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 9:03 PM, Jonathan Gallimore <
>> >> jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Thanks all!
>> >>>
>> >>> I have looked at the test failures on the CI. The bval-embedded tests
>> >>> should be ok now - the other failures were in the openejb-mockito
>> module,
>> >>> and I think they relate to this change in OWB:
>> https://github.com/apache
>> >>> /openwebbeans/commit/89c18915afc2173ec1c5478ca6dc09ecce322d2a
>> >>>
>> >>> To be honest, I don't know where to start looking at this one, can
>> anyone
>> >>> help? I'd appreciate any learning I can do in the process. In essence,
>> >>> we're seeing this:
>> >>>
>> >>> Caused by: javax.enterprise.inject.UnsatisfiedResolutionException: Api
>> >>> type [org.apache.openejb.mockito.Hello] is not found with the
>> qualifiers
>> >>> Qualifiers: [@javax.enterprise.inject.Default()]
>> >>> for injection into Field Injection Point, field name :  helloCdi, Bean
>> >>> Owner : [Facade, WebBeansType:ENTERPRISE, Name:null, API
>> >>> Types:[org.apache.openejb.mockito.Facade,java.lang.Object],
>> >>> Qualifiers:[javax.enterprise.inject.Default,javax.
>> enterprise.inject.Any]]
>> >>> at org.apache.webbeans.util.InjectionExceptionUtil.throwUnsatis
>> >>> fiedResolutionException(InjectionExceptionUtil.java:65)
>> >>> at org.apache.webbeans.container.InjectionResolver.checkInjecti
>> >>> onPoint(InjectionResolver.java:234)
>> >>> at org.apache.webbeans.container.BeanManagerImpl.validate(BeanM
>> >>> anagerImpl.java:1209)
>> >>> at org.apache.webbeans.util.WebBeansUtil.validate(
>> WebBeansUtil.java:1709)
>> >>> at org.apache.webbeans.config.BeansDeployer.validate(BeansDeplo
>> >>> yer.java:924)
>> >>> at org.apache.webbeans.config.BeansDeployer.validateInjectionPo
>> >>> ints(BeansDeployer.java:835)
>> >>> at org.apache.webbeans.config.BeansDeployer.deploy(BeansDeploye
>> >>> r.java:318)
>> >>> ... 24 more
>> >>>
>> >>> As far as I can see the extension adds the necessary stuff
>> >>> on javax.enterprise.inject.spi.AfterBeanDiscovery here:
>> >>> https://github.com/apache/tomee/blob/master/utils/
>> >>> openejb-mockito/src/main/java/org/apache/openejb/mockito/
>> >>> MockitoExtension.java#L53
>> >>>
>> >>> I'll a build without that change to a) confirm that it is that change,
>> >>> and b) see if that shows any different behaviour.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> Here's the output from the tests:
>> >>>
>> >>> -
>> >>>
>> >>> /Library/Java/JavaVirtualMachines/jdk1.8.0_
>> 141.jdk/Contents/Home/bin/java
>> >>> -ea -Didea.test.cyclic.buffer.size=1048576 "-javaagent:/Applications/
>> IntelliJ
>> >>> IDEA.app/Contents/lib/idea_rt.jar=50678:/Applications/IntelliJ
>> >>> IDEA.app/Contents/bin" -Dfile.encoding=UTF-8 -classpath
>> >>> "/Applications/IntelliJ IDEA.app/Contents/lib/idea_rt.
>> jar:/Applications/IntelliJ
>> >>> IDEA.app/Contents/plugins/junit/lib/junit-rt.jar:/
>> Applications/IntelliJ
>> >>> IDEA.app/Contents/plugins/junit/lib/junit5-rt.jar:/Library/
>> >>> 

Re: Releasing OWB-1.7.5?

[Jonathan Gallimore]

+1

On Fri, 27 Apr 2018, 10:53 Mark Struberg,  wrote:

> Hi folks!
>
> How does OWB-1.7.5-SNAPSHOT look like in TomEE-1.7.5-snap?
>
> If no problems did pop up then I'd love to run the OWB-1.7.5 release this
> afternoon.
>
> Please shout out if there is any showstopper.
>
> txs and LieGrue,
> strub
>
>