Re: TOMEE-3846 flavors comparison page / TOMEE-3871 - TomEE Plume is missing BatchEE / JCS Cache
Sounds awesome, everyone. Total side note. I cannot express how much I love seeing this much engagement and collaboration. Often times PRs don't get any feedback at all and sit for months. It's really fantastic to see activity like this. -David > On Apr 12, 2022, at 11:29 AM, Swell wrote: > > This reflects my first attempts, i still have them "per-version" > uncommited, already linking to specs by precise version > > so it wont be too hard for me to turn around, and give you these versions. > > the drawback is these pages may have to be maintained on dependencies > updates and releases, but that may be ok and clearer for users visiting the > website. > > i'll send the per version to "tomee" repo first then the page for website > repo > > On Tue, 12 Apr 2022 at 20:09, Zowalla, Richard < > richard.zowa...@hs-heilbronn.de> wrote: > >> Makes sense, imho. Thanks for the thoughts, David. >> That would simplify it for the reader. >> >> If we have it per version and link the per version documents from the >> overall comparision, we are proabably in a good shape. >> >> >> >> Am Dienstag, dem 12.04.2022 um 10:58 -0700 schrieb David Blevins: >>> Hey All, >>> >>> I see there's a big thread on PR#37. >>> >>> - https://github.com/apache/tomee-site-generator/pull/37 >>> >>> My gut reaction is that we might be trying to achieve the impossible >>> by trying to fit every TomEE version and every Java EE/Jakarta EE >>> version into one massive matrix or page. >>> >>> What do people think about potentially pausing that, taking a step >>> back and seeing if there's a simpler approach. Often when I'm >>> working on code and I notice it's getting just too big and hard to >>> fit in my head or on the page in a way that makes sense, I change my >>> approach. Instead of trying to solve the whole problem at once, I >>> just take a slice of it that I know I'll need and work on it till >>> it's clean. Then I move on and take another small slice and >>> repeat. As I keep going I often find there is no more big mess, not >>> because I found a better way to do it, but because I never needed it. >>> >>> My advice would be to give this a try. Pause the big PR#37 and shift >>> gears. Instead try nailing just a basic comparison page for TomEE 9 >>> that is like the one that's there, but adds the spec versions, links >>> to the spec documents and the java information. >>> >>> I.e. we copy this page >>> >>> - >>> >> https://github.com/apache/tomee-site-generator/blob/master/src/main/jbake/content/comparison.adoc >>> >>> To here: >>> >>> - >>> https://github.com/apache/tomee/commits/master/docs/comparison.adoc >>> >>> Then we start with adding the spec versions and the spec links and >>> get that merged. Afterwards we try adding the java information, and >>> get that merged. Once we have a page we all like, we move on and do >>> the same for TomEE 8.0 >>> >>> - >>> https://github.com/apache/tomee/blob/tomee-8.x/docs/comparison.adoc >>> >>> If we have the energy, let's do 7.1 and 7.0 since we're still >>> releasing those once in a while. >>> >>> Each page will be of course only mentioning the specifications they >>> implement. We can even use the exact spec names as they existed, so >>> for example, all the TomEE 7.0 stuff would say "Java EE" not "Jakarta >>> EE" and use "Enterprise JavaBeans" not "Jakarta EnterpriseBeans", >>> etc. >>> >>> Once we get individual pages for each TomEE version, we will likely >>> have a different perspective on what we need for the main comparison >>> page. Possibly we'll need very little as the individual pages will >>> be doing most the hard work. >>> >>> >>> Thoughts? >>> >>> >>> -David >>> On Apr 5, 2022, at 5:42 AM, Swell wrote: Thanks Richard, two pages can be pre-reviewed : • compare-jakarta-versions.html • comparison.html i believe we can choose only one of the two for release. which one do you find more readable ? (they differ in the detailed list of jakarta specs.) i'll try to update my page later to better reflect JRE ranges and your warnings on JRE/ASM. i have reflected JL work regarding MicroProfile dependencies in my draft PR. also we could update TomEE 8.x to MicroProfile 4.1, (SmallRye?) but is it worth ? Swell On Tue, 5 Apr 2022 at 11:49, Zowalla, Richard < richard.zowa...@hs-heilbronn.de> wrote: Hi Swell, > my TomEE 8.x is working on both JDK 11 and 17 with a small app. > What features can be broken with wrong JDK/ASM version ? (1) If you are running with an unsupported version of ASM the server might not startup or the deployment of applications will simply not work. Most of often this will result in an exception (rather early) telling you, that ASM does not support this specific version of Java. (2) Our scripts are rather defensively written,
Re: TOMEE-3846 flavors comparison page / TOMEE-3871 - TomEE Plume is missing BatchEE / JCS Cache
This reflects my first attempts, i still have them "per-version" uncommited, already linking to specs by precise version so it wont be too hard for me to turn around, and give you these versions. the drawback is these pages may have to be maintained on dependencies updates and releases, but that may be ok and clearer for users visiting the website. i'll send the per version to "tomee" repo first then the page for website repo On Tue, 12 Apr 2022 at 20:09, Zowalla, Richard < richard.zowa...@hs-heilbronn.de> wrote: > Makes sense, imho. Thanks for the thoughts, David. > That would simplify it for the reader. > > If we have it per version and link the per version documents from the > overall comparision, we are proabably in a good shape. > > > > Am Dienstag, dem 12.04.2022 um 10:58 -0700 schrieb David Blevins: > > Hey All, > > > > I see there's a big thread on PR#37. > > > > - https://github.com/apache/tomee-site-generator/pull/37 > > > > My gut reaction is that we might be trying to achieve the impossible > > by trying to fit every TomEE version and every Java EE/Jakarta EE > > version into one massive matrix or page. > > > > What do people think about potentially pausing that, taking a step > > back and seeing if there's a simpler approach. Often when I'm > > working on code and I notice it's getting just too big and hard to > > fit in my head or on the page in a way that makes sense, I change my > > approach. Instead of trying to solve the whole problem at once, I > > just take a slice of it that I know I'll need and work on it till > > it's clean. Then I move on and take another small slice and > > repeat. As I keep going I often find there is no more big mess, not > > because I found a better way to do it, but because I never needed it. > > > > My advice would be to give this a try. Pause the big PR#37 and shift > > gears. Instead try nailing just a basic comparison page for TomEE 9 > > that is like the one that's there, but adds the spec versions, links > > to the spec documents and the java information. > > > > I.e. we copy this page > > > > - > > > https://github.com/apache/tomee-site-generator/blob/master/src/main/jbake/content/comparison.adoc > > > > To here: > > > > - > > https://github.com/apache/tomee/commits/master/docs/comparison.adoc > > > > Then we start with adding the spec versions and the spec links and > > get that merged. Afterwards we try adding the java information, and > > get that merged. Once we have a page we all like, we move on and do > > the same for TomEE 8.0 > > > > - > > https://github.com/apache/tomee/blob/tomee-8.x/docs/comparison.adoc > > > > If we have the energy, let's do 7.1 and 7.0 since we're still > > releasing those once in a while. > > > > Each page will be of course only mentioning the specifications they > > implement. We can even use the exact spec names as they existed, so > > for example, all the TomEE 7.0 stuff would say "Java EE" not "Jakarta > > EE" and use "Enterprise JavaBeans" not "Jakarta EnterpriseBeans", > > etc. > > > > Once we get individual pages for each TomEE version, we will likely > > have a different perspective on what we need for the main comparison > > page. Possibly we'll need very little as the individual pages will > > be doing most the hard work. > > > > > > Thoughts? > > > > > > -David > > > > > On Apr 5, 2022, at 5:42 AM, Swell wrote: > > > > > > Thanks Richard, > > > > > > two pages can be pre-reviewed : > > > • compare-jakarta-versions.html > > > • comparison.html > > > i believe we can choose only one of the two for release. which one > > > do you find more readable ? > > > (they differ in the detailed list of jakarta specs.) > > > > > > i'll try to update my page later to better reflect JRE ranges and > > > your warnings on JRE/ASM. > > > i have reflected JL work regarding MicroProfile dependencies in my > > > draft PR. > > > > > > > > > also we could update TomEE 8.x to MicroProfile 4.1, > > > (SmallRye?) but is it worth ? > > > > > > Swell > > > > > > On Tue, 5 Apr 2022 at 11:49, Zowalla, Richard < > > > richard.zowa...@hs-heilbronn.de> wrote: > > > Hi Swell, > > > > > > > my TomEE 8.x is working on both JDK 11 and 17 with a small app. > > > > What > > > features can be broken with wrong JDK/ASM version ? > > > > > > (1) If you are running with an unsupported version of ASM the > > > server > > > might not startup or the deployment of applications will simply not > > > work. Most of often this will result in an exception (rather early) > > > telling you, that ASM does not support this specific version of > > > Java. > > > > > > (2) Our scripts are rather defensively written, but you might > > > encounter > > > issues with unsupported JVM flags (between major JDK versions) or > > > certain other mechanisms do not work (i.e. usages of Unsafe, > > > Illegal > > > Reflective Access, etc.) > > > > > > Most often this happens with "too new" JDKs (i.e. JDK 18-GA) as we > > > need > > > some time to adjust /
Re: TOMEE-3846 flavors comparison page / TOMEE-3871 - TomEE Plume is missing BatchEE / JCS Cache
> > all the TomEE 7.0 stuff would say "Java EE" not "Jakarta EE" and use > "Enterprise JavaBeans" not "Jakarta EnterpriseBeans", etc. Agree, I overlooked the fact that spec names changed along with namespace. El mar, 12 abr 2022 a las 12:09, Zowalla, Richard (< richard.zowa...@hs-heilbronn.de>) escribió: > Makes sense, imho. Thanks for the thoughts, David. > That would simplify it for the reader. > > If we have it per version and link the per version documents from the > overall comparision, we are proabably in a good shape. > > > > Am Dienstag, dem 12.04.2022 um 10:58 -0700 schrieb David Blevins: > > Hey All, > > > > I see there's a big thread on PR#37. > > > > - https://github.com/apache/tomee-site-generator/pull/37 > > > > My gut reaction is that we might be trying to achieve the impossible > > by trying to fit every TomEE version and every Java EE/Jakarta EE > > version into one massive matrix or page. > > > > What do people think about potentially pausing that, taking a step > > back and seeing if there's a simpler approach. Often when I'm > > working on code and I notice it's getting just too big and hard to > > fit in my head or on the page in a way that makes sense, I change my > > approach. Instead of trying to solve the whole problem at once, I > > just take a slice of it that I know I'll need and work on it till > > it's clean. Then I move on and take another small slice and > > repeat. As I keep going I often find there is no more big mess, not > > because I found a better way to do it, but because I never needed it. > > > > My advice would be to give this a try. Pause the big PR#37 and shift > > gears. Instead try nailing just a basic comparison page for TomEE 9 > > that is like the one that's there, but adds the spec versions, links > > to the spec documents and the java information. > > > > I.e. we copy this page > > > > - > > > https://github.com/apache/tomee-site-generator/blob/master/src/main/jbake/content/comparison.adoc > > > > To here: > > > > - > > https://github.com/apache/tomee/commits/master/docs/comparison.adoc > > > > Then we start with adding the spec versions and the spec links and > > get that merged. Afterwards we try adding the java information, and > > get that merged. Once we have a page we all like, we move on and do > > the same for TomEE 8.0 > > > > - > > https://github.com/apache/tomee/blob/tomee-8.x/docs/comparison.adoc > > > > If we have the energy, let's do 7.1 and 7.0 since we're still > > releasing those once in a while. > > > > Each page will be of course only mentioning the specifications they > > implement. We can even use the exact spec names as they existed, so > > for example, all the TomEE 7.0 stuff would say "Java EE" not "Jakarta > > EE" and use "Enterprise JavaBeans" not "Jakarta EnterpriseBeans", > > etc. > > > > Once we get individual pages for each TomEE version, we will likely > > have a different perspective on what we need for the main comparison > > page. Possibly we'll need very little as the individual pages will > > be doing most the hard work. > > > > > > Thoughts? > > > > > > -David > > > > > On Apr 5, 2022, at 5:42 AM, Swell wrote: > > > > > > Thanks Richard, > > > > > > two pages can be pre-reviewed : > > > • compare-jakarta-versions.html > > > • comparison.html > > > i believe we can choose only one of the two for release. which one > > > do you find more readable ? > > > (they differ in the detailed list of jakarta specs.) > > > > > > i'll try to update my page later to better reflect JRE ranges and > > > your warnings on JRE/ASM. > > > i have reflected JL work regarding MicroProfile dependencies in my > > > draft PR. > > > > > > > > > also we could update TomEE 8.x to MicroProfile 4.1, > > > (SmallRye?) but is it worth ? > > > > > > Swell > > > > > > On Tue, 5 Apr 2022 at 11:49, Zowalla, Richard < > > > richard.zowa...@hs-heilbronn.de> wrote: > > > Hi Swell, > > > > > > > my TomEE 8.x is working on both JDK 11 and 17 with a small app. > > > > What > > > features can be broken with wrong JDK/ASM version ? > > > > > > (1) If you are running with an unsupported version of ASM the > > > server > > > might not startup or the deployment of applications will simply not > > > work. Most of often this will result in an exception (rather early) > > > telling you, that ASM does not support this specific version of > > > Java. > > > > > > (2) Our scripts are rather defensively written, but you might > > > encounter > > > issues with unsupported JVM flags (between major JDK versions) or > > > certain other mechanisms do not work (i.e. usages of Unsafe, > > > Illegal > > > Reflective Access, etc.) > > > > > > Most often this happens with "too new" JDKs (i.e. JDK 18-GA) as we > > > need > > > some time to adjust / test or wait for transient libs to be updated > > > (matter of resources). > > > > > > > TomEE works on both JDK and JRE, but can use more memory/cache in > > > JDK. is this right ? Is JDK to be preferred ? > > >
Re: TOMEE-3846 flavors comparison page / TOMEE-3871 - TomEE Plume is missing BatchEE / JCS Cache
Makes sense, imho. Thanks for the thoughts, David. That would simplify it for the reader. If we have it per version and link the per version documents from the overall comparision, we are proabably in a good shape. Am Dienstag, dem 12.04.2022 um 10:58 -0700 schrieb David Blevins: > Hey All, > > I see there's a big thread on PR#37. > > - https://github.com/apache/tomee-site-generator/pull/37 > > My gut reaction is that we might be trying to achieve the impossible > by trying to fit every TomEE version and every Java EE/Jakarta EE > version into one massive matrix or page. > > What do people think about potentially pausing that, taking a step > back and seeing if there's a simpler approach. Often when I'm > working on code and I notice it's getting just too big and hard to > fit in my head or on the page in a way that makes sense, I change my > approach. Instead of trying to solve the whole problem at once, I > just take a slice of it that I know I'll need and work on it till > it's clean. Then I move on and take another small slice and > repeat. As I keep going I often find there is no more big mess, not > because I found a better way to do it, but because I never needed it. > > My advice would be to give this a try. Pause the big PR#37 and shift > gears. Instead try nailing just a basic comparison page for TomEE 9 > that is like the one that's there, but adds the spec versions, links > to the spec documents and the java information. > > I.e. we copy this page > > - > https://github.com/apache/tomee-site-generator/blob/master/src/main/jbake/content/comparison.adoc > > To here: > > - > https://github.com/apache/tomee/commits/master/docs/comparison.adoc > > Then we start with adding the spec versions and the spec links and > get that merged. Afterwards we try adding the java information, and > get that merged. Once we have a page we all like, we move on and do > the same for TomEE 8.0 > > - > https://github.com/apache/tomee/blob/tomee-8.x/docs/comparison.adoc > > If we have the energy, let's do 7.1 and 7.0 since we're still > releasing those once in a while. > > Each page will be of course only mentioning the specifications they > implement. We can even use the exact spec names as they existed, so > for example, all the TomEE 7.0 stuff would say "Java EE" not "Jakarta > EE" and use "Enterprise JavaBeans" not "Jakarta EnterpriseBeans", > etc. > > Once we get individual pages for each TomEE version, we will likely > have a different perspective on what we need for the main comparison > page. Possibly we'll need very little as the individual pages will > be doing most the hard work. > > > Thoughts? > > > -David > > > On Apr 5, 2022, at 5:42 AM, Swell wrote: > > > > Thanks Richard, > > > > two pages can be pre-reviewed : > > • compare-jakarta-versions.html > > • comparison.html > > i believe we can choose only one of the two for release. which one > > do you find more readable ? > > (they differ in the detailed list of jakarta specs.) > > > > i'll try to update my page later to better reflect JRE ranges and > > your warnings on JRE/ASM. > > i have reflected JL work regarding MicroProfile dependencies in my > > draft PR. > > > > > > also we could update TomEE 8.x to MicroProfile 4.1, > > (SmallRye?) but is it worth ? > > > > Swell > > > > On Tue, 5 Apr 2022 at 11:49, Zowalla, Richard < > > richard.zowa...@hs-heilbronn.de> wrote: > > Hi Swell, > > > > > my TomEE 8.x is working on both JDK 11 and 17 with a small app. > > > What > > features can be broken with wrong JDK/ASM version ? > > > > (1) If you are running with an unsupported version of ASM the > > server > > might not startup or the deployment of applications will simply not > > work. Most of often this will result in an exception (rather early) > > telling you, that ASM does not support this specific version of > > Java. > > > > (2) Our scripts are rather defensively written, but you might > > encounter > > issues with unsupported JVM flags (between major JDK versions) or > > certain other mechanisms do not work (i.e. usages of Unsafe, > > Illegal > > Reflective Access, etc.) > > > > Most often this happens with "too new" JDKs (i.e. JDK 18-GA) as we > > need > > some time to adjust / test or wait for transient libs to be updated > > (matter of resources). > > > > > TomEE works on both JDK and JRE, but can use more memory/cache in > > JDK. is this right ? Is JDK to be preferred ? > > > > We are running TomEE with JRE (not JDK) in production and/or in > > container environments (due to size). AFAIK our TomEE docker images > > also rely on JRE (rather than JDK). > > > > > * TomEE implements MicroProfile 2.0 on branches 7.x, 8.x, 9.x ? > > > or > > other MP versions ? > > > > AFAIK we only support MP 2.x at the moment (in 7.x, 8.x and 9.x). > > JL is > > currently working on upgrading MP on 9.x with the smallray impl to > > make > > it work with the Jakarata namespace change. > > > > Hope it
[GitHub] [tomee-site-generator] dblevins commented on pull request #37: TOMEE-3846 improve main comparison page and fix per version comparison pages
dblevins commented on PR #37: URL: https://github.com/apache/tomee-site-generator/pull/37#issuecomment-1097027873 Hey All, I posted some thoughts to the dev list. If people can read and respond there, that'd be great. -- 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. To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomee.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
Re: TOMEE-3846 flavors comparison page / TOMEE-3871 - TomEE Plume is missing BatchEE / JCS Cache
Hey All, I see there's a big thread on PR#37. - https://github.com/apache/tomee-site-generator/pull/37 My gut reaction is that we might be trying to achieve the impossible by trying to fit every TomEE version and every Java EE/Jakarta EE version into one massive matrix or page. What do people think about potentially pausing that, taking a step back and seeing if there's a simpler approach. Often when I'm working on code and I notice it's getting just too big and hard to fit in my head or on the page in a way that makes sense, I change my approach. Instead of trying to solve the whole problem at once, I just take a slice of it that I know I'll need and work on it till it's clean. Then I move on and take another small slice and repeat. As I keep going I often find there is no more big mess, not because I found a better way to do it, but because I never needed it. My advice would be to give this a try. Pause the big PR#37 and shift gears. Instead try nailing just a basic comparison page for TomEE 9 that is like the one that's there, but adds the spec versions, links to the spec documents and the java information. I.e. we copy this page - https://github.com/apache/tomee-site-generator/blob/master/src/main/jbake/content/comparison.adoc To here: - https://github.com/apache/tomee/commits/master/docs/comparison.adoc Then we start with adding the spec versions and the spec links and get that merged. Afterwards we try adding the java information, and get that merged. Once we have a page we all like, we move on and do the same for TomEE 8.0 - https://github.com/apache/tomee/blob/tomee-8.x/docs/comparison.adoc If we have the energy, let's do 7.1 and 7.0 since we're still releasing those once in a while. Each page will be of course only mentioning the specifications they implement. We can even use the exact spec names as they existed, so for example, all the TomEE 7.0 stuff would say "Java EE" not "Jakarta EE" and use "Enterprise JavaBeans" not "Jakarta EnterpriseBeans", etc. Once we get individual pages for each TomEE version, we will likely have a different perspective on what we need for the main comparison page. Possibly we'll need very little as the individual pages will be doing most the hard work. Thoughts? -David > On Apr 5, 2022, at 5:42 AM, Swell wrote: > > Thanks Richard, > > two pages can be pre-reviewed : > • compare-jakarta-versions.html > • comparison.html > i believe we can choose only one of the two for release. which one do you > find more readable ? > (they differ in the detailed list of jakarta specs.) > > i'll try to update my page later to better reflect JRE ranges and your > warnings on JRE/ASM. > i have reflected JL work regarding MicroProfile dependencies in my draft PR. > > > also we could update TomEE 8.x to MicroProfile 4.1, > (SmallRye?) but is it worth ? > > Swell > > On Tue, 5 Apr 2022 at 11:49, Zowalla, Richard > wrote: > Hi Swell, > > > my TomEE 8.x is working on both JDK 11 and 17 with a small app. What > features can be broken with wrong JDK/ASM version ? > > (1) If you are running with an unsupported version of ASM the server > might not startup or the deployment of applications will simply not > work. Most of often this will result in an exception (rather early) > telling you, that ASM does not support this specific version of Java. > > (2) Our scripts are rather defensively written, but you might encounter > issues with unsupported JVM flags (between major JDK versions) or > certain other mechanisms do not work (i.e. usages of Unsafe, Illegal > Reflective Access, etc.) > > Most often this happens with "too new" JDKs (i.e. JDK 18-GA) as we need > some time to adjust / test or wait for transient libs to be updated > (matter of resources). > > > TomEE works on both JDK and JRE, but can use more memory/cache in > JDK. is this right ? Is JDK to be preferred ? > > We are running TomEE with JRE (not JDK) in production and/or in > container environments (due to size). AFAIK our TomEE docker images > also rely on JRE (rather than JDK). > > > * TomEE implements MicroProfile 2.0 on branches 7.x, 8.x, 9.x ? or > other MP versions ? > > AFAIK we only support MP 2.x at the moment (in 7.x, 8.x and 9.x). JL is > currently working on upgrading MP on 9.x with the smallray impl to make > it work with the Jakarata namespace change. > > Hope it helps > Richard > > > Am Samstag, dem 02.04.2022 um 16:09 +0200 schrieb Swell: > > Thanks ! > > > > i've put some work for the website comparison pages on a draft PR > > https://github.com/apache/tomee-site-generator/pull/37 > > though I lack some info : > > > > * TomEE works on both JDK and JRE, but can use more memory/cache in > > JDK. is this right ? Is JDK to be preferred ? > > * my TomEE 8.x is working on both JDK 11 and 17 with a small app. > > What features can be broken with wrong JDK/ASM version ? > > * TomEE implements MicroProfile 2.0 on branches 7.x, 8.x,
[GitHub] [tomee-site-generator] sultan commented on pull request #37: TOMEE-3846 improve main comparison page and fix per version comparison pages
sultan commented on PR #37: URL: https://github.com/apache/tomee-site-generator/pull/37#issuecomment-1096902169 the only problem i wont be able to solve, is that, if i shorten the first table, then i lose some info that are not mirrored in the detailed table. e.g. TomEE 7.x are not in the detailed table:   and now the specs for EE 7 servlets etc are gone ... -- 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. To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomee.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [tomee-site-generator] sultan commented on pull request #37: TOMEE-3846 improve main comparison page and fix per version comparison pages
sultan commented on PR #37: URL: https://github.com/apache/tomee-site-generator/pull/37#issuecomment-1096884472 To answer your question, the problem that could be solved by a short spec table was the mess eclipse is for my students  but again i have other means to counter the problem, (if not by TomEE doc) <3 -- 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. To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomee.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [tomee-site-generator] sultan commented on pull request #37: TOMEE-3846 improve main comparison page and fix per version comparison pages
sultan commented on PR #37: URL: https://github.com/apache/tomee-site-generator/pull/37#issuecomment-1096870916 i wont say too much on why the schools i teach in forbid the use of maven/gradle at the stage my learners are ... there are solutions for me without this :-) (or add that to my course instead of TomEE docs) anyway your comments shed more light on how i could make it more readable, so we might need less tables in the end. javadoc main page and comparison page are tied together because of TomEE 9 update to MicroProfile 5, it made sense to me to have them together. i'll send something as soon as can, thanks for your feedbacks. -- 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. To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomee.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
Re: Time for a TomEE 8.0.11 maintenance release?
Thanks so much Richard -- Jean-Louis Monteiro http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro http://www.tomitribe.com On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 2:45 PM Zowalla, Richard < richard.zowa...@hs-heilbronn.de> wrote: > As a short update: JL and myself discussed the idea by David from [1] > via Slack. We will try out the 4-eye approach in order to share > knowledge of doing releases for TomEE. > > I will take some notes during the process to put it back into up 2 date > release documentation. > > Gruß > Richard > > Am Dienstag, dem 12.04.2022 um 09:33 + schrieb Zowalla, Richard: > > +1 > > > > Question: We once talked about sharing knowledge about doing releases > > [1], so I am wondering, if we should use 8.0.11 as a pilot test for > > this approach? > > > > For reference changes currently targeted for 8.0.11 (from Jira) > > attached below. > > > > Gruß > > Richard > > > > [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/dj0s8lldxlkqnfy43hwnclzwbgv40xht > > > > > > == Dependency upgrade > > > > [.compact] > > - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3872[TOMEE-3872] > > Hibernate Integration 5.6.7 > > - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3858[TOMEE-3858] > > OpenJPA 3.2.2 > > - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3841[TOMEE-3841] > > SLF4J 1.7.36 > > - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3845[TOMEE-3845] > > Tomcat 9.0.59 > > - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3855[TOMEE-3855] > > Tomcat 9.0.60 > > - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3856[TOMEE-3856] > > jackson 2.13.2 > > - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3893[TOMEE-3893] > > jackson 2.13.2.2 > > - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3886[TOMEE-3886] > > tomcat 9.0.62 > > > > == Bug > > > > [.compact] > > - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3892[TOMEE-3892] > > TomEE Maven Plugin does not allow to override default "-ea" in > > RemoteServer > > - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3871[TOMEE-3871] > > TomEE Plume is missing BatchEE / JCS Cache > > - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3876[TOMEE-3876] > > BOM generation corrupted under windows (slash problems) > > - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3848[TOMEE-3848] > > Apache TomEE 8.0.6 onwards is packaged with quartz-2.2.4.jar > > - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3840[TOMEE-3840] > > TomEE WebProfile 8.0.9 does not start with security enabled > > - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3860[TOMEE-3860] > > Upgrade jackson-databind for CVE-2020-36518 > > > > == Improvement > > > > [.compact] > > - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3851[TOMEE-3851] > > Replace Google Analytics with ASF Matomo > > - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3842[TOMEE-3842] > > GitHub Actions fails for PullRequest Builds due to BOM auto > > generation > > - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3859[TOMEE-3859] > > Update tomee.xml file so it refers to the right location > > > > == Task > > > > [.compact] > > - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3852[TOMEE-3852] > > Review the website in regard to external embedding of resources (JS, > > Fonts, CSS) > > - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3853[TOMEE-3853] > > Link ASF Privacy Policy from TomEE Website > > > > == Documentation > > > > [.compact] > > - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3894[TOMEE-3894] > > website generation broken under windows > > - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3854[TOMEE-3854] > > Provide a first draft of a link collection page targeting > > contributor/committer resources > > - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3888[TOMEE-3888] > > Cleanup documentation > > - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3846[TOMEE-3846] > > Inconsistence between tomee flavors comparison in website and actual > > jars > > - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3847[TOMEE-3847] > > Exception when building website from windows os > > - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3814[TOMEE-3814] > > Commented SSL Connector fix for tomee server.xml > > > > == Fixed Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures (CVEs) > > > > [.compact] > > - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3893[TOMEE-3893] > > Upgrade to jackson 2.13.2.2 > > - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3856[TOMEE-3856] > > Upgrade to jackson 2.13.2 > > - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3860[TOMEE-3860] > > Upgrade jackson-databind for CVE-2020-36518 > > > > > > Am Dienstag, dem 12.04.2022 um 11:14 +0200 schrieb Jean-Louis > > Monteiro: > > > Hi all, > > > > > > We have a couple of important fixes and the CVE (Tomcat at least). > > > Is it ok to do a release? > > > -- > > > Jean-Louis Monteiro > > > http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro > > > http://www.tomitribe.com >
Re: Time for a TomEE 8.0.11 maintenance release?
As a short update: JL and myself discussed the idea by David from [1] via Slack. We will try out the 4-eye approach in order to share knowledge of doing releases for TomEE. I will take some notes during the process to put it back into up 2 date release documentation. Gruß Richard Am Dienstag, dem 12.04.2022 um 09:33 + schrieb Zowalla, Richard: > +1 > > Question: We once talked about sharing knowledge about doing releases > [1], so I am wondering, if we should use 8.0.11 as a pilot test for > this approach? > > For reference changes currently targeted for 8.0.11 (from Jira) > attached below. > > Gruß > Richard > > [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/dj0s8lldxlkqnfy43hwnclzwbgv40xht > > > == Dependency upgrade > > [.compact] > - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3872[TOMEE-3872] > Hibernate Integration 5.6.7 > - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3858[TOMEE-3858] > OpenJPA 3.2.2 > - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3841[TOMEE-3841] > SLF4J 1.7.36 > - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3845[TOMEE-3845] > Tomcat 9.0.59 > - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3855[TOMEE-3855] > Tomcat 9.0.60 > - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3856[TOMEE-3856] > jackson 2.13.2 > - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3893[TOMEE-3893] > jackson 2.13.2.2 > - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3886[TOMEE-3886] > tomcat 9.0.62 > > == Bug > > [.compact] > - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3892[TOMEE-3892] > TomEE Maven Plugin does not allow to override default "-ea" in > RemoteServer > - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3871[TOMEE-3871] > TomEE Plume is missing BatchEE / JCS Cache > - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3876[TOMEE-3876] > BOM generation corrupted under windows (slash problems) > - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3848[TOMEE-3848] > Apache TomEE 8.0.6 onwards is packaged with quartz-2.2.4.jar > - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3840[TOMEE-3840] > TomEE WebProfile 8.0.9 does not start with security enabled > - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3860[TOMEE-3860] > Upgrade jackson-databind for CVE-2020-36518 > > == Improvement > > [.compact] > - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3851[TOMEE-3851] > Replace Google Analytics with ASF Matomo > - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3842[TOMEE-3842] > GitHub Actions fails for PullRequest Builds due to BOM auto > generation > - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3859[TOMEE-3859] > Update tomee.xml file so it refers to the right location > > == Task > > [.compact] > - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3852[TOMEE-3852] > Review the website in regard to external embedding of resources (JS, > Fonts, CSS) > - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3853[TOMEE-3853] > Link ASF Privacy Policy from TomEE Website > > == Documentation > > [.compact] > - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3894[TOMEE-3894] > website generation broken under windows > - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3854[TOMEE-3854] > Provide a first draft of a link collection page targeting > contributor/committer resources > - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3888[TOMEE-3888] > Cleanup documentation > - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3846[TOMEE-3846] > Inconsistence between tomee flavors comparison in website and actual > jars > - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3847[TOMEE-3847] > Exception when building website from windows os > - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3814[TOMEE-3814] > Commented SSL Connector fix for tomee server.xml > > == Fixed Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures (CVEs) > > [.compact] > - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3893[TOMEE-3893] > Upgrade to jackson 2.13.2.2 > - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3856[TOMEE-3856] > Upgrade to jackson 2.13.2 > - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3860[TOMEE-3860] > Upgrade jackson-databind for CVE-2020-36518 > > > Am Dienstag, dem 12.04.2022 um 11:14 +0200 schrieb Jean-Louis > Monteiro: > > Hi all, > > > > We have a couple of important fixes and the CVE (Tomcat at least). > > Is it ok to do a release? > > -- > > Jean-Louis Monteiro > > http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro > > http://www.tomitribe.com smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
[GitHub] [tomee] Celebrate-future opened a new pull request, #852: Could org.apache.tomee:tomee-server-version:9.0.0-M8-SNAPSHOT drop off redundant dependencies?
Celebrate-future opened a new pull request, #852: URL: https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/852 Hi! I found the pom file of project **_org.apache.tomee:tomee-server-version:9.0.0-M8-SNAPSHOT_** introduced **_6_** dependencies. However, among them, **_3_** libraries (**_50%_**) are not used by your project. I list the redundant dependencies below (labelled as red ones in the figure): ## Redundant dependencies org.tomitribe:tomitribe-util:jar:1.2.3:compile org.tomitribe:swizzle:jar:1.0:compile org.apache.commons:commons-compress:jar:1.14:compile --- Removing the redundant dependencies can reduce the size of project and prevent potential dependency conflict issues (i.e., multiple versions of the same library). More importantly, one of the redundant dependencies **_org.apache.commons:commons-compress:jar:1.14:compile_** incorporates a medium-level vulnerability SNYK-JAVA-ORGAPACHECOMMONS-1316639. As such, I suggest a refactoring operation for **_org.apache.tomee:tomee-server-version:9.0.0-M8-SNAPSHOT_**’s pom file. The attached PR helps resolve the reported problem. It is safe to remove the unused libraries (we considered Java reflection relations when analyzing the dependencies). These changes have passed **_org.apache.tomee:tomee-server-version:9.0.0-M8-SNAPSHOT_**’s maven tests. Best regards  -- 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. To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomee.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [tomee] rzo1 merged pull request #851: Regenerated BOMs after dependency upgrades
rzo1 merged PR #851: URL: https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/851 -- 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. To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomee.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
Re: Time for a TomEE 8.0.11 maintenance release?
+1 Question: We once talked about sharing knowledge about doing releases [1], so I am wondering, if we should use 8.0.11 as a pilot test for this approach? For reference changes currently targeted for 8.0.11 (from Jira) attached below. Gruß Richard [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/dj0s8lldxlkqnfy43hwnclzwbgv40xht == Dependency upgrade [.compact] - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3872[TOMEE-3872] Hibernate Integration 5.6.7 - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3858[TOMEE-3858] OpenJPA 3.2.2 - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3841[TOMEE-3841] SLF4J 1.7.36 - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3845[TOMEE-3845] Tomcat 9.0.59 - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3855[TOMEE-3855] Tomcat 9.0.60 - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3856[TOMEE-3856] jackson 2.13.2 - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3893[TOMEE-3893] jackson 2.13.2.2 - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3886[TOMEE-3886] tomcat 9.0.62 == Bug [.compact] - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3892[TOMEE-3892] TomEE Maven Plugin does not allow to override default "-ea" in RemoteServer - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3871[TOMEE-3871] TomEE Plume is missing BatchEE / JCS Cache - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3876[TOMEE-3876] BOM generation corrupted under windows (slash problems) - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3848[TOMEE-3848] Apache TomEE 8.0.6 onwards is packaged with quartz-2.2.4.jar - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3840[TOMEE-3840] TomEE WebProfile 8.0.9 does not start with security enabled - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3860[TOMEE-3860] Upgrade jackson-databind for CVE-2020-36518 == Improvement [.compact] - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3851[TOMEE-3851] Replace Google Analytics with ASF Matomo - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3842[TOMEE-3842] GitHub Actions fails for PullRequest Builds due to BOM auto generation - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3859[TOMEE-3859] Update tomee.xml file so it refers to the right location == Task [.compact] - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3852[TOMEE-3852] Review the website in regard to external embedding of resources (JS, Fonts, CSS) - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3853[TOMEE-3853] Link ASF Privacy Policy from TomEE Website == Documentation [.compact] - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3894[TOMEE-3894] website generation broken under windows - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3854[TOMEE-3854] Provide a first draft of a link collection page targeting contributor/committer resources - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3888[TOMEE-3888] Cleanup documentation - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3846[TOMEE-3846] Inconsistence between tomee flavors comparison in website and actual jars - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3847[TOMEE-3847] Exception when building website from windows os - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3814[TOMEE-3814] Commented SSL Connector fix for tomee server.xml == Fixed Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures (CVEs) [.compact] - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3893[TOMEE-3893] Upgrade to jackson 2.13.2.2 - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3856[TOMEE-3856] Upgrade to jackson 2.13.2 - link:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-3860[TOMEE-3860] Upgrade jackson-databind for CVE-2020-36518 Am Dienstag, dem 12.04.2022 um 11:14 +0200 schrieb Jean-Louis Monteiro: > Hi all, > > We have a couple of important fixes and the CVE (Tomcat at least). > Is it ok to do a release? > -- > Jean-Louis Monteiro > http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro > http://www.tomitribe.com smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
[GitHub] [tomee] github-actions[bot] opened a new pull request, #851: Regenerated BOMs after dependency upgrades
github-actions[bot] opened a new pull request, #851: URL: https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/851 Found some uncommited changes (from BOM regeneration) after running build on TomEE master -- 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. To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomee.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
Time for a TomEE 8.0.11 maintenance release?
Hi all, We have a couple of important fixes and the CVE (Tomcat at least). Is it ok to do a release? -- Jean-Louis Monteiro http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro http://www.tomitribe.com
