[Antora Website] home page experiment

[David Jencks]

At least two people (David Blevins and Cesar Hernandez) have expressed the idea 
that the “static site” should not be generated by Antora.  I’ve been wondering 
why, and what the “static site” might be.  The home page of the current site 
seems like the most obvious candidate, so I decided to learn a little bit of 
css…

Investigating the source of the current home page, it appears to be a 
hodgepodge of outdated table layout and scripts and css whose origin is not 
clear to me.  Understanding what it does I found rather difficult.

I’ve replicated most of the features of the current home page in an .adoc page 
rendered by Antora.  I learned enough css for now, so I didn’t pursue an exact 
replica.  I imagine that for someone who knows a reasonable amount of css 
finishing the synchronization would be easy.

Present:

- Layout and images
- general behavior of hover animation

Missing:

- clipping on background image
- “typewriter” effect on subtitle (personally this reminds me of a “blink” 
tag….)
- specific details of hover animation

I find the .adoc source very clear about the structure of the resulting page, 
and the css is really quite short and to the point.  I can easily understand 
and work with both.

What is better about the current situation?

——

Preview:  https://tomee-preview.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/

branches “home-page” at 

- tomee-antora  (playbook)

- tomee-antora-ui 

— css: src/css/home-doc.css, src/css/home.css 
(https://raw.githubusercontent.com/djencks/tomee-antora-ui/home-page/src/css/home-doc.css)
— layout: src/layouts/home-page.hbs, src/partials/home-body.hbs

- tomee-site-generator 

— tomee/modules/ROOT/pages/home-page.adoc  
(https://raw.githubusercontent.com/djencks/tomee-site-generator/home-page/tomee/modules/ROOT/pages/home-page.adoc)

David Jencks

Re: [VOTE] Release TomEE 8.0.4 and 9.0.0-M2

[Jean-Louis Monteiro]

Hey Jon.

Did some quick tests and ran TCK. No regression, we even fixed some good
chunk of tests for better TCK coverage.

+1

--
Jean-Louis Monteiro
http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
http://www.tomitribe.com


On Thu, Jul 23, 2020 at 3:29 PM Vicente Rossello 
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I've checked the artifacts and played a bit with the plus server.
>
> +1
>
> On Thu, Jul 23, 2020 at 2:58 PM Zowalla, Richard <
> richard.zowa...@hs-heilbronn.de> wrote:
>
>> Thanks for the exaplantion, Jon. I will take a look at the transformer
>> and apply it to our application after I have returned from vacation.
>>
>> For now:
>>
>> Take my +1 (although I've only tested 8.0.4 as stated in my original
>> mail).
>>
>> Am Donnerstag, den 23.07.2020, 12:41 +0100 schrieb Jonathan Gallimore:
>>
>> Hi Richard
>>
>>
>> The artifacts are here:
>>
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachetomee-1173/org/apache/tomee/jakarta/apache-tomee/9.0.0-M2/
>>
>>
>> (note the org.apache.tomee.jakarta group ID).
>>
>>
>> The transformation tool currently only works on zips, which is why we don't
>>
>> (yet) have tar.gzs there.
>>
>>
>> Its worth taking a look at the Eclipse Transformer to transform your
>>
>> applications. This is another case where I'd expect issues, and encourage
>>
>> you to report them. I'm also a committer on that project and would be keen
>>
>> to help with any improvements. Here's how we do it on Moviefun:
>>
>> https://github.com/apache/tomee/blob/master/examples/moviefun/pom.xml#L111-L126
>>
>> .
>>
>>
>> We're not able to translate javax -> jakarta "on the fly". I have looked at
>>
>> this, and theoretically its possible to create a java agent to do this, but
>>
>> it comes unstuck where various libraries inspect classes for annotations,
>>
>> and none of them actually *load* the class to do that (so it doesn't get
>>
>> translated, and subsequently fails). Unfortunately, the renaming means
>>
>> we'll all need to make changes to our applications at some point.
>>
>>
>> Jon
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 23, 2020 at 12:04 PM Zowalla, Richard <
>>
>> richard.zowa...@hs-heilbronn.de> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Hi Jon,
>>
>>
>> thanks for the explanation.
>>
>>
>> The artifacts for 9.0.0-M2 seem to be missing in the Maven staging
>>
>> repository? Is this known/planned in this way?
>>
>>
>> I just wanted to build our project (which works fine with 8.0.4) with
>>
>> the 9.0.0-M2 artifacts.
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Richard
>>
>>
>>
>> Am Donnerstag, den 23.07.2020, 10:39 +0100 schrieb Jonathan Gallimore:
>>
>> Dammit, accidentally hit send far too soon. Here's the whole message:
>>
>>
>>
>> Hi folks
>>
>>
>> Thanks for the reviews and feedback so far.
>>
>>
>> I've seen a couple of comments come in that I just wanted to
>>
>> briefly address.
>>
>>
>> The vote is TomEE 8.0.4 *and* 9.0.0-M2. A +1 is a +1 for both. You
>>
>> can't
>>
>> vote +1 for 8.0.4 and 0 (or abstain) for 9.0.0-M2, for example. I can
>>
>> cancel this vote, re-roll, and issue a separate vote for the 2, if we
>>
>> wish.
>>
>> I didn't do this on this occasion, because we're producing the binary
>>
>> that
>>
>> uses javax (8.0.4) and then transforming it to produce the version
>>
>> that
>>
>> uses jakarta (9.0.0-M2), but can do so going forward.
>>
>>
>> We don't expect 9.0.0-M2 to be perfect. We're grateful if you can
>>
>> report
>>
>> issues you find, but that shouldn't necessarily block the release. I
>>
>> totally understand that migrating your own projects to the jakarta
>>
>> namespace is a big deal and unlikely to be feasible for a vote. If
>>
>> you can
>>
>> check you can download it and boot it up, and check for any legal
>>
>> issues,
>>
>> bad libraries etc, that helps. If you'd like an example app to try,
>>
>> do try
>>
>> building the moviefun example. That (like many of the examples)
>>
>> produces
>>
>> both javax and jakarta .war files.
>>
>>
>> Jean-Louis is going to run the TCK against this, which is fantastic.
>>
>> A
>>
>> couple of notes here to set expectations - I'm not expecting a full
>>
>> pass,
>>
>> but I'm also not expecting regressions, so passing the TCK shouldn't
>>
>> block
>>
>> the release. I did have to comment out the new security module (sorry
>>
>> -
>>
>> there were some JAX-RS test failures with it), so those tests still
>>
>> won't
>>
>> pass.
>>
>>
>> Hope that all makes sense, but please ask any questions you may have.
>>
>> Many
>>
>> thanks again for your reviews.
>>
>>
>> Jon
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 23, 2020 at 10:30 AM Jonathan Gallimore <
>>
>> jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Hi folks
>>
>>
>> Thanks for the reviews and feedback so far.
>>
>>
>> I've seen a couple of comments come in that I just wanted to
>>
>> briefly address.
>>
>>
>> The vote is TomEE 8.0.4 *and* 9.0.0-M2. A +1 is a +1 for both. You
>>
>> can't
>>
>> vote +1 for 8.0.4 and 0 (or abstain) for 9.0.0-M2, for example. I
>>
>> can close
>>
>> this vote, re-roll, and issue a separate vote for the 2, if we
>>
>> wish.
>>
>>
>> I 

Re: [VOTE] Release TomEE 8.0.4 and 9.0.0-M2

[Vicente Rossello]

Hi,

I've checked the artifacts and played a bit with the plus server.

+1

On Thu, Jul 23, 2020 at 2:58 PM Zowalla, Richard <
richard.zowa...@hs-heilbronn.de> wrote:

> Thanks for the exaplantion, Jon. I will take a look at the transformer and
> apply it to our application after I have returned from vacation.
>
> For now:
>
> Take my +1 (although I've only tested 8.0.4 as stated in my original mail).
>
> Am Donnerstag, den 23.07.2020, 12:41 +0100 schrieb Jonathan Gallimore:
>
> Hi Richard
>
>
> The artifacts are here:
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachetomee-1173/org/apache/tomee/jakarta/apache-tomee/9.0.0-M2/
>
>
> (note the org.apache.tomee.jakarta group ID).
>
>
> The transformation tool currently only works on zips, which is why we don't
>
> (yet) have tar.gzs there.
>
>
> Its worth taking a look at the Eclipse Transformer to transform your
>
> applications. This is another case where I'd expect issues, and encourage
>
> you to report them. I'm also a committer on that project and would be keen
>
> to help with any improvements. Here's how we do it on Moviefun:
>
> https://github.com/apache/tomee/blob/master/examples/moviefun/pom.xml#L111-L126
>
> .
>
>
> We're not able to translate javax -> jakarta "on the fly". I have looked at
>
> this, and theoretically its possible to create a java agent to do this, but
>
> it comes unstuck where various libraries inspect classes for annotations,
>
> and none of them actually *load* the class to do that (so it doesn't get
>
> translated, and subsequently fails). Unfortunately, the renaming means
>
> we'll all need to make changes to our applications at some point.
>
>
> Jon
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 23, 2020 at 12:04 PM Zowalla, Richard <
>
> richard.zowa...@hs-heilbronn.de> wrote:
>
>
> Hi Jon,
>
>
> thanks for the explanation.
>
>
> The artifacts for 9.0.0-M2 seem to be missing in the Maven staging
>
> repository? Is this known/planned in this way?
>
>
> I just wanted to build our project (which works fine with 8.0.4) with
>
> the 9.0.0-M2 artifacts.
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Richard
>
>
>
> Am Donnerstag, den 23.07.2020, 10:39 +0100 schrieb Jonathan Gallimore:
>
> Dammit, accidentally hit send far too soon. Here's the whole message:
>
>
>
> Hi folks
>
>
> Thanks for the reviews and feedback so far.
>
>
> I've seen a couple of comments come in that I just wanted to
>
> briefly address.
>
>
> The vote is TomEE 8.0.4 *and* 9.0.0-M2. A +1 is a +1 for both. You
>
> can't
>
> vote +1 for 8.0.4 and 0 (or abstain) for 9.0.0-M2, for example. I can
>
> cancel this vote, re-roll, and issue a separate vote for the 2, if we
>
> wish.
>
> I didn't do this on this occasion, because we're producing the binary
>
> that
>
> uses javax (8.0.4) and then transforming it to produce the version
>
> that
>
> uses jakarta (9.0.0-M2), but can do so going forward.
>
>
> We don't expect 9.0.0-M2 to be perfect. We're grateful if you can
>
> report
>
> issues you find, but that shouldn't necessarily block the release. I
>
> totally understand that migrating your own projects to the jakarta
>
> namespace is a big deal and unlikely to be feasible for a vote. If
>
> you can
>
> check you can download it and boot it up, and check for any legal
>
> issues,
>
> bad libraries etc, that helps. If you'd like an example app to try,
>
> do try
>
> building the moviefun example. That (like many of the examples)
>
> produces
>
> both javax and jakarta .war files.
>
>
> Jean-Louis is going to run the TCK against this, which is fantastic.
>
> A
>
> couple of notes here to set expectations - I'm not expecting a full
>
> pass,
>
> but I'm also not expecting regressions, so passing the TCK shouldn't
>
> block
>
> the release. I did have to comment out the new security module (sorry
>
> -
>
> there were some JAX-RS test failures with it), so those tests still
>
> won't
>
> pass.
>
>
> Hope that all makes sense, but please ask any questions you may have.
>
> Many
>
> thanks again for your reviews.
>
>
> Jon
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 23, 2020 at 10:30 AM Jonathan Gallimore <
>
> jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Hi folks
>
>
> Thanks for the reviews and feedback so far.
>
>
> I've seen a couple of comments come in that I just wanted to
>
> briefly address.
>
>
> The vote is TomEE 8.0.4 *and* 9.0.0-M2. A +1 is a +1 for both. You
>
> can't
>
> vote +1 for 8.0.4 and 0 (or abstain) for 9.0.0-M2, for example. I
>
> can close
>
> this vote, re-roll, and issue a separate vote for the 2, if we
>
> wish.
>
>
> I didn't, because we're producing the binary that uses javax
>
> (8.0.4) and
>
> then transforming it to produce the version that uses jakarta
>
> (9.0.0-M2).
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 3:34 PM Jonathan Gallimore <
>
> jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Hi All,
>
>
> I am delighted to present a vote for Apache TomEE 9.0.0-M2 and
>
> Apache
>
> TomEE 8.0.4.
>
>
>
> Maven Repo:
>
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachetomee-1173/
>
>
> Binaries & Source:
>
>
> 

Re: [VOTE] Release TomEE 8.0.4 and 9.0.0-M2

[Zowalla, Richard]

Thanks for the exaplantion, Jon. I will take a look at the transformer
and apply it to our application after I have returned from vacation.
For now: 
Take my +1 (although I've only tested 8.0.4 as stated in my original
mail).
Am Donnerstag, den 23.07.2020, 12:41 +0100 schrieb Jonathan Gallimore:
> Hi Richard
> The artifacts are here:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachetomee-1173/org/apache/tomee/jakarta/apache-tomee/9.0.0-M2/
> (note the org.apache.tomee.jakarta group ID).
> The transformation tool currently only works on zips, which is why we
> don't(yet) have tar.gzs there.
> Its worth taking a look at the Eclipse Transformer to transform
> yourapplications. This is another case where I'd expect issues, and
> encourageyou to report them. I'm also a committer on that project and
> would be keento help with any improvements. Here's how we do it on
> Moviefun:
> https://github.com/apache/tomee/blob/master/examples/moviefun/pom.xml#L111-L126
> .
> We're not able to translate javax -> jakarta "on the fly". I have
> looked atthis, and theoretically its possible to create a java agent
> to do this, butit comes unstuck where various libraries inspect
> classes for annotations,and none of them actually *load* the class to
> do that (so it doesn't gettranslated, and subsequently fails).
> Unfortunately, the renaming meanswe'll all need to make changes to
> our applications at some point.
> Jon
> On Thu, Jul 23, 2020 at 12:04 PM Zowalla, Richard <
> richard.zowa...@hs-heilbronn.de> wrote:
> Hi Jon,
> thanks for the explanation.
> The artifacts for 9.0.0-M2 seem to be missing in the Maven
> stagingrepository? Is this known/planned in this way?
> I just wanted to build our project (which works fine with 8.0.4)
> withthe 9.0.0-M2 artifacts.
> Thanks,Richard
> 
> Am Donnerstag, den 23.07.2020, 10:39 +0100 schrieb Jonathan
> Gallimore:
> Dammit, accidentally hit send far too soon. Here's the whole message:
> 
> Hi folks
> Thanks for the reviews and feedback so far.
> I've seen a couple of comments come in that I just wanted tobriefly
> address.
> The vote is TomEE 8.0.4 *and* 9.0.0-M2. A +1 is a +1 for both.
> Youcan'tvote +1 for 8.0.4 and 0 (or abstain) for 9.0.0-M2, for
> example. I cancancel this vote, re-roll, and issue a separate vote
> for the 2, if wewish.I didn't do this on this occasion, because we're
> producing the binarythatuses javax (8.0.4) and then transforming it
> to produce the versionthatuses jakarta (9.0.0-M2), but can do so
> going forward.
> We don't expect 9.0.0-M2 to be perfect. We're grateful if you
> canreportissues you find, but that shouldn't necessarily block the
> release. Itotally understand that migrating your own projects to the
> jakartanamespace is a big deal and unlikely to be feasible for a
> vote. Ifyou cancheck you can download it and boot it up, and check
> for any legalissues,bad libraries etc, that helps. If you'd like an
> example app to try,do trybuilding the moviefun example. That (like
> many of the examples)producesboth javax and jakarta .war files.
> Jean-Louis is going to run the TCK against this, which is
> fantastic.Acouple of notes here to set expectations - I'm not
> expecting a fullpass,but I'm also not expecting regressions, so
> passing the TCK shouldn'tblockthe release. I did have to comment out
> the new security module (sorry-there were some JAX-RS test failures
> with it), so those tests stillwon'tpass.
> Hope that all makes sense, but please ask any questions you may
> have.Manythanks again for your reviews.
> Jon
> On Thu, Jul 23, 2020 at 10:30 AM Jonathan Gallimore <
> jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi folks
> Thanks for the reviews and feedback so far.
> I've seen a couple of comments come in that I just wanted tobriefly
> address.
> The vote is TomEE 8.0.4 *and* 9.0.0-M2. A +1 is a +1 for both.
> Youcan'tvote +1 for 8.0.4 and 0 (or abstain) for 9.0.0-M2, for
> example. Ican closethis vote, re-roll, and issue a separate vote for
> the 2, if wewish.
> I didn't, because we're producing the binary that uses javax(8.0.4)
> andthen transforming it to produce the version that uses
> jakarta(9.0.0-M2).
> On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 3:34 PM Jonathan Gallimore <
> jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi All,
> I am delighted to present a vote for Apache TomEE 9.0.0-M2
> andApacheTomEE 8.0.4.
> 
> Maven Repo:
> 
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachetomee-1173/
> 
> Binaries & Source:
> 
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/tomee/staging-1173/tomee-8.0.4/
> 
> Source code:TomEE 8.0.4:
> 
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/tomee/staging-1173/tomee-8.0.4/tomee-project-8.0.4-source-release.zip
> TomEE Jakarta Conversion for 9.0.0-M2:
> 
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/tomee/staging-1173/tomee-8.0.4/apache-tomee-9.0.0-M2-source-release.zip
> 
> Tags:
> 
> 
> 
https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=tomee.git;a=tag;h=refs/tags/tomee-project-8.0.4
> 
> 

Re: [VOTE] Release TomEE 8.0.4 and 9.0.0-M2

[Jonathan Gallimore]

Hi Richard

The artifacts are here:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachetomee-1173/org/apache/tomee/jakarta/apache-tomee/9.0.0-M2/

(note the org.apache.tomee.jakarta group ID).

The transformation tool currently only works on zips, which is why we don't
(yet) have tar.gzs there.

Its worth taking a look at the Eclipse Transformer to transform your
applications. This is another case where I'd expect issues, and encourage
you to report them. I'm also a committer on that project and would be keen
to help with any improvements. Here's how we do it on Moviefun:
https://github.com/apache/tomee/blob/master/examples/moviefun/pom.xml#L111-L126
.

We're not able to translate javax -> jakarta "on the fly". I have looked at
this, and theoretically its possible to create a java agent to do this, but
it comes unstuck where various libraries inspect classes for annotations,
and none of them actually *load* the class to do that (so it doesn't get
translated, and subsequently fails). Unfortunately, the renaming means
we'll all need to make changes to our applications at some point.

Jon

On Thu, Jul 23, 2020 at 12:04 PM Zowalla, Richard <
richard.zowa...@hs-heilbronn.de> wrote:

> Hi Jon,
>
> thanks for the explanation.
>
> The artifacts for 9.0.0-M2 seem to be missing in the Maven staging
> repository? Is this known/planned in this way?
>
> I just wanted to build our project (which works fine with 8.0.4) with
> the 9.0.0-M2 artifacts.
>
> Thanks,
> Richard
>
>
> Am Donnerstag, den 23.07.2020, 10:39 +0100 schrieb Jonathan Gallimore:
> > Dammit, accidentally hit send far too soon. Here's the whole message:
> >
> >
> > Hi folks
> >
> > Thanks for the reviews and feedback so far.
> >
> > I've seen a couple of comments come in that I just wanted to
> > briefly address.
> >
> > The vote is TomEE 8.0.4 *and* 9.0.0-M2. A +1 is a +1 for both. You
> > can't
> > vote +1 for 8.0.4 and 0 (or abstain) for 9.0.0-M2, for example. I can
> > cancel this vote, re-roll, and issue a separate vote for the 2, if we
> > wish.
> > I didn't do this on this occasion, because we're producing the binary
> > that
> > uses javax (8.0.4) and then transforming it to produce the version
> > that
> > uses jakarta (9.0.0-M2), but can do so going forward.
> >
> > We don't expect 9.0.0-M2 to be perfect. We're grateful if you can
> > report
> > issues you find, but that shouldn't necessarily block the release. I
> > totally understand that migrating your own projects to the jakarta
> > namespace is a big deal and unlikely to be feasible for a vote. If
> > you can
> > check you can download it and boot it up, and check for any legal
> > issues,
> > bad libraries etc, that helps. If you'd like an example app to try,
> > do try
> > building the moviefun example. That (like many of the examples)
> > produces
> > both javax and jakarta .war files.
> >
> > Jean-Louis is going to run the TCK against this, which is fantastic.
> > A
> > couple of notes here to set expectations - I'm not expecting a full
> > pass,
> > but I'm also not expecting regressions, so passing the TCK shouldn't
> > block
> > the release. I did have to comment out the new security module (sorry
> > -
> > there were some JAX-RS test failures with it), so those tests still
> > won't
> > pass.
> >
> > Hope that all makes sense, but please ask any questions you may have.
> > Many
> > thanks again for your reviews.
> >
> > Jon
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 23, 2020 at 10:30 AM Jonathan Gallimore <
> > jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi folks
> > >
> > > Thanks for the reviews and feedback so far.
> > >
> > > I've seen a couple of comments come in that I just wanted to
> > > briefly address.
> > >
> > > The vote is TomEE 8.0.4 *and* 9.0.0-M2. A +1 is a +1 for both. You
> > > can't
> > > vote +1 for 8.0.4 and 0 (or abstain) for 9.0.0-M2, for example. I
> > > can close
> > > this vote, re-roll, and issue a separate vote for the 2, if we
> > > wish.
> > >
> > > I didn't, because we're producing the binary that uses javax
> > > (8.0.4) and
> > > then transforming it to produce the version that uses jakarta
> > > (9.0.0-M2).
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 3:34 PM Jonathan Gallimore <
> > > jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi All,
> > > >
> > > > I am delighted to present a vote for Apache TomEE 9.0.0-M2 and
> > > > Apache
> > > > TomEE 8.0.4.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Maven Repo:
> > > >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachetomee-1173/
> > > >
> > > > Binaries & Source:
> > > >
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/tomee/staging-1173/tomee-8.0.4/
> > > >
> > > > Source code:
> > > > TomEE 8.0.4:
> > > >
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/tomee/staging-1173/tomee-8.0.4/tomee-project-8.0.4-source-release.zip
> > > > TomEE Jakarta Conversion for 9.0.0-M2:
> > > >
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/tomee/staging-1173/tomee-8.0.4/apache-tomee-9.0.0-M2-source-release.zip
> > > >
> > > > Tags:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> 

Re: [VOTE] Release TomEE 8.0.4 and 9.0.0-M2

[Zowalla, Richard]

Hi Jon,

thanks for the explanation.

The artifacts for 9.0.0-M2 seem to be missing in the Maven staging
repository? Is this known/planned in this way?

I just wanted to build our project (which works fine with 8.0.4) with
the 9.0.0-M2 artifacts.

Thanks,
Richard


Am Donnerstag, den 23.07.2020, 10:39 +0100 schrieb Jonathan Gallimore:
> Dammit, accidentally hit send far too soon. Here's the whole message:
> 
> 
> Hi folks
> 
> Thanks for the reviews and feedback so far.
> 
> I've seen a couple of comments come in that I just wanted to
> briefly address.
> 
> The vote is TomEE 8.0.4 *and* 9.0.0-M2. A +1 is a +1 for both. You
> can't
> vote +1 for 8.0.4 and 0 (or abstain) for 9.0.0-M2, for example. I can
> cancel this vote, re-roll, and issue a separate vote for the 2, if we
> wish.
> I didn't do this on this occasion, because we're producing the binary
> that
> uses javax (8.0.4) and then transforming it to produce the version
> that
> uses jakarta (9.0.0-M2), but can do so going forward.
> 
> We don't expect 9.0.0-M2 to be perfect. We're grateful if you can
> report
> issues you find, but that shouldn't necessarily block the release. I
> totally understand that migrating your own projects to the jakarta
> namespace is a big deal and unlikely to be feasible for a vote. If
> you can
> check you can download it and boot it up, and check for any legal
> issues,
> bad libraries etc, that helps. If you'd like an example app to try,
> do try
> building the moviefun example. That (like many of the examples)
> produces
> both javax and jakarta .war files.
> 
> Jean-Louis is going to run the TCK against this, which is fantastic.
> A
> couple of notes here to set expectations - I'm not expecting a full
> pass,
> but I'm also not expecting regressions, so passing the TCK shouldn't
> block
> the release. I did have to comment out the new security module (sorry
> -
> there were some JAX-RS test failures with it), so those tests still
> won't
> pass.
> 
> Hope that all makes sense, but please ask any questions you may have.
> Many
> thanks again for your reviews.
> 
> Jon
> 
> On Thu, Jul 23, 2020 at 10:30 AM Jonathan Gallimore <
> jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > Hi folks
> > 
> > Thanks for the reviews and feedback so far.
> > 
> > I've seen a couple of comments come in that I just wanted to
> > briefly address.
> > 
> > The vote is TomEE 8.0.4 *and* 9.0.0-M2. A +1 is a +1 for both. You
> > can't
> > vote +1 for 8.0.4 and 0 (or abstain) for 9.0.0-M2, for example. I
> > can close
> > this vote, re-roll, and issue a separate vote for the 2, if we
> > wish.
> > 
> > I didn't, because we're producing the binary that uses javax
> > (8.0.4) and
> > then transforming it to produce the version that uses jakarta
> > (9.0.0-M2).
> > 
> > On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 3:34 PM Jonathan Gallimore <
> > jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > Hi All,
> > > 
> > > I am delighted to present a vote for Apache TomEE 9.0.0-M2 and
> > > Apache
> > > TomEE 8.0.4.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Maven Repo:
> > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachetomee-1173/
> > > 
> > > Binaries & Source:
> > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/tomee/staging-1173/tomee-8.0.4/
> > > 
> > > Source code:
> > > TomEE 8.0.4:
> > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/tomee/staging-1173/tomee-8.0.4/tomee-project-8.0.4-source-release.zip
> > > TomEE Jakarta Conversion for 9.0.0-M2:
> > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/tomee/staging-1173/tomee-8.0.4/apache-tomee-9.0.0-M2-source-release.zip
> > > 
> > > Tags:
> > > 
> > > 
> > > https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=tomee.git;a=tag;h=refs/tags/tomee-project-8.0.4
> > > 
> > > https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=tomee-jakarta.git;a=tag;h=refs/tags/tomee-9.0.0-M2
> > > 
> > > Release notes:
> > > 
> > > 
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12312320=12348414
> > > 
> > > Please VOTE:
> > > 
> > > [+1] Yes, release it
> > > [+0] Not fussed
> > > [-1] Don't release, there's a showstopper (please specify what
> > > the
> > > showstopper is)
> > > 
> > > Vote will be open for 72 hours.
> > > 
> > > Here is my +1.
> > > 
> > > Thanks
> > > 
> > > Jon
> > > 


smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

Re: [VOTE] Release TomEE 8.0.4 and 9.0.0-M2

[Jonathan Gallimore]

Dammit, accidentally hit send far too soon. Here's the whole message:


Hi folks

Thanks for the reviews and feedback so far.

I've seen a couple of comments come in that I just wanted to
briefly address.

The vote is TomEE 8.0.4 *and* 9.0.0-M2. A +1 is a +1 for both. You can't
vote +1 for 8.0.4 and 0 (or abstain) for 9.0.0-M2, for example. I can
cancel this vote, re-roll, and issue a separate vote for the 2, if we wish.
I didn't do this on this occasion, because we're producing the binary that
uses javax (8.0.4) and then transforming it to produce the version that
uses jakarta (9.0.0-M2), but can do so going forward.

We don't expect 9.0.0-M2 to be perfect. We're grateful if you can report
issues you find, but that shouldn't necessarily block the release. I
totally understand that migrating your own projects to the jakarta
namespace is a big deal and unlikely to be feasible for a vote. If you can
check you can download it and boot it up, and check for any legal issues,
bad libraries etc, that helps. If you'd like an example app to try, do try
building the moviefun example. That (like many of the examples) produces
both javax and jakarta .war files.

Jean-Louis is going to run the TCK against this, which is fantastic. A
couple of notes here to set expectations - I'm not expecting a full pass,
but I'm also not expecting regressions, so passing the TCK shouldn't block
the release. I did have to comment out the new security module (sorry -
there were some JAX-RS test failures with it), so those tests still won't
pass.

Hope that all makes sense, but please ask any questions you may have. Many
thanks again for your reviews.

Jon

On Thu, Jul 23, 2020 at 10:30 AM Jonathan Gallimore <
jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi folks
>
> Thanks for the reviews and feedback so far.
>
> I've seen a couple of comments come in that I just wanted to
> briefly address.
>
> The vote is TomEE 8.0.4 *and* 9.0.0-M2. A +1 is a +1 for both. You can't
> vote +1 for 8.0.4 and 0 (or abstain) for 9.0.0-M2, for example. I can close
> this vote, re-roll, and issue a separate vote for the 2, if we wish.
>
> I didn't, because we're producing the binary that uses javax (8.0.4) and
> then transforming it to produce the version that uses jakarta (9.0.0-M2).
>
> On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 3:34 PM Jonathan Gallimore <
> jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> I am delighted to present a vote for Apache TomEE 9.0.0-M2 and Apache
>> TomEE 8.0.4.
>>
>>
>> Maven Repo:
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachetomee-1173/
>>
>> Binaries & Source:
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/tomee/staging-1173/tomee-8.0.4/
>>
>> Source code:
>> TomEE 8.0.4:
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/tomee/staging-1173/tomee-8.0.4/tomee-project-8.0.4-source-release.zip
>> TomEE Jakarta Conversion for 9.0.0-M2:
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/tomee/staging-1173/tomee-8.0.4/apache-tomee-9.0.0-M2-source-release.zip
>>
>> Tags:
>>
>>
>> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=tomee.git;a=tag;h=refs/tags/tomee-project-8.0.4
>>
>> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=tomee-jakarta.git;a=tag;h=refs/tags/tomee-9.0.0-M2
>>
>> Release notes:
>>
>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12312320=12348414
>>
>> Please VOTE:
>>
>> [+1] Yes, release it
>> [+0] Not fussed
>> [-1] Don't release, there's a showstopper (please specify what the
>> showstopper is)
>>
>> Vote will be open for 72 hours.
>>
>> Here is my +1.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Jon
>>
>

Re: [VOTE] Release TomEE 8.0.4 and 9.0.0-M2

[Jonathan Gallimore]

Hi folks

Thanks for the reviews and feedback so far.

I've seen a couple of comments come in that I just wanted to
briefly address.

The vote is TomEE 8.0.4 *and* 9.0.0-M2. A +1 is a +1 for both. You can't
vote +1 for 8.0.4 and 0 (or abstain) for 9.0.0-M2, for example. I can close
this vote, re-roll, and issue a separate vote for the 2, if we wish.

I didn't, because we're producing the binary that uses javax (8.0.4) and
then transforming it to produce the version that uses jakarta (9.0.0-M2).

On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 3:34 PM Jonathan Gallimore <
jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> I am delighted to present a vote for Apache TomEE 9.0.0-M2 and Apache
> TomEE 8.0.4.
>
>
> Maven Repo:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachetomee-1173/
>
> Binaries & Source:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/tomee/staging-1173/tomee-8.0.4/
>
> Source code:
> TomEE 8.0.4:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/tomee/staging-1173/tomee-8.0.4/tomee-project-8.0.4-source-release.zip
> TomEE Jakarta Conversion for 9.0.0-M2:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/tomee/staging-1173/tomee-8.0.4/apache-tomee-9.0.0-M2-source-release.zip
>
> Tags:
>
>
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=tomee.git;a=tag;h=refs/tags/tomee-project-8.0.4
>
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=tomee-jakarta.git;a=tag;h=refs/tags/tomee-9.0.0-M2
>
> Release notes:
>
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12312320=12348414
>
> Please VOTE:
>
> [+1] Yes, release it
> [+0] Not fussed
> [-1] Don't release, there's a showstopper (please specify what the
> showstopper is)
>
> Vote will be open for 72 hours.
>
> Here is my +1.
>
> Thanks
>
> Jon
>

[GitHub] [tomee] cocorossello commented on pull request #693: Owb2.0.17

[GitBox]

cocorossello commented on pull request #693:
URL: https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/693#issuecomment-662888382


   updated PR to use the snapshot



This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org

[GitHub] [tomee] rmannibucau commented on pull request #693: Owb2.0.17

[GitBox]

rmannibucau commented on pull request #693:
URL: https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/693#issuecomment-662882947


   Guess a snapshot can be already tested (just deployed it).



This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org

[GitHub] [tomee] cocorossello commented on pull request #693: Owb2.0.17

[GitBox]

cocorossello commented on pull request #693:
URL: https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/693#issuecomment-662880032


   We will have to wait for OWB 2.0.18



This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org