Re: Fwd: [2/4] tomee git commit: Preparation for Microprofile

Well the last discussion was about finding a way to unify the efforts.I totally don't care whether this will be over at Geronimo or at TomEE. If it is at TomEE, then this effort clearly has to be done in a way which doesn't confuse users.Which means it must be totally clear which parts are

Re: Implementing Microprofile JWT

Added project stubs: https://github.com/apache/tomee/tree/master/microprofile Andy. On 05/02/18 11:17, Jean-Louis Monteiro wrote: Hi, Ok thanks guys. @Rudy, you are most welcome :) -- Jean-Louis Monteiro http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro http://www.tomitribe.com On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at

Re: Implementing Microprofile JWT

And what's that for? Is there any behind the scene stuff going on at Tomitribe or can we finally get back to discussing such things on the Apache lists? Before we go on I'd would first finish the discussion how we want to turn TomEE into an umbrella project or how the structure would be. And

Re: Implementing Microprofile JWT

"Parts of the components skeletons you just created" They're just logically named empty modules for pending work? On 12/02/18 20:42, Mark Struberg wrote: And what's that for? Is there any behind the scene stuff going on at Tomitribe or can we finally get back to discussing such things on

Re: Implementing Microprofile JWT

Reverted. On 12/02/18 21:14, Andy Gumbrecht wrote: "Parts of the components skeletons you just created" They're just logically named empty modules for pending work? On 12/02/18 20:42, Mark Struberg wrote: And what's that for? Is there any behind the scene stuff going on at Tomitribe or

Re: Implementing Microprofile JWT

Well, let's be a bit more specific. a.) No, Geronimo of course does not have have a monopoly on creating microprofile implementations at the ASF. Nor does TomEE. Geronimo a good place for reusable JavaEE parts though. And G started to implement Microprofile specifications 2 years ago already.

Re: Implementing Microprofile JWT

I'll apologize for not doing more on TomEE 8. But that is simply a time thing, and not a Tomitribe thing. I still owe a fixed build on master (which I am working on tonight) and forward porting the latest master patches to the EE8 branch. That work is not forgotten, just has to be fitted in with

Re: Fwd: [2/4] tomee git commit: Preparation for Microprofile

There is no implementation here at all, it is just the current spec modules to start writing tests. I wanted to start writing a test for geronimo config without interfering with anything else. No worries. I'll revert it and start a private branch. On 12/02/18 20:45, Mark Struberg wrote:

Re: Fwd: [2/4] tomee git commit: Preparation for Microprofile

You can PR it @geronimo if it is to add test coverage or to contribute samples. We are on github normally. Let me know if you need some help/pointers. Le 12 févr. 2018 21:21, "Andy Gumbrecht" a écrit : > There is no implementation here at all, it is just the current

Re: Implementing Microprofile JWT

Any issues let me know and I'll fix tomorrow - not staying up for the buildbot. On 12/02/18 21:14, Andy Gumbrecht wrote: "Parts of the components skeletons you just created" They're just logically named empty modules for pending work? On 12/02/18 20:42, Mark Struberg wrote: And what's

Re: Fwd: [2/4] tomee git commit: Preparation for Microprofile

Oki, that was totally not obvious - sorry for getting this wrong ;) Well but my other points are still valid: how do we like to continue with that stuff?With sheldon, etc getting donated we HAVE to solve those issues.Except if we say that those parts will become heavily TomEE centric and would

Re: Implementing Microprofile JWT

It seems we all got hit on the wrong foot in some ways. Why not take the chance to learn something and make it better. For me: I should have asked what this is about instead of assuming something which looked clear from my pov. Seems I was wrong. @Andy what about creating a ticket on the issue

Re: Implementing Microprofile JWT

No Andy, as mentionned in the discussion Geronimo hosts the microprofile @asf. This is why jwt should probably be done in geronimo which is the asf ee related project umbrella. I understand it is not the most convenient for tomitribe which probably perfers to own the full project(s) but as a

Re: Implementing Microprofile JWT

On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 8:20 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: > No Andy, as mentionned in the discussion Geronimo hosts the microprofile > @asf. This is why jwt should probably be done in geronimo which is the asf > ee related project umbrella. > I don't recall that

Re: Implementing Microprofile JWT

I find the discussions and working on TomEE have become tedious, contentious, unrewarding and fruitless in order to continue working on the project in my free time. That'd be why I've not contributed recently, but not speaking for others of course. I wasn't actually trying to start any

Re: Fwd: [2/4] tomee git commit: Preparation for Microprofile

No worries Mark - I'll just work off the grid for now. On 12/02/18 21:52, Mark Struberg wrote: Oki, that was totally not obvious - sorry for getting this wrong ;) Well but my other points are still valid: how do we like to continue with that stuff?With sheldon, etc getting donated we HAVE to

Re: Implementing Microprofile JWT

> On Feb 12, 2018, at 1:45 PM, Mark Struberg wrote: > > It seems we all got hit on the wrong foot in some ways. > Why not take the chance to learn something and make it better. > For me: I should have asked what this is about instead of assuming something > which

Re: Let's do better

Instead of shooting to someone or start arguing. Simply asking would take all misunderstand off and avoid this disgusting mess. Le 13 févr. 2018 08:33, "Mark Struberg" a écrit : > +1 words - and especially brief once as emails - are just a mapping from > the reality

"Umbrella" discussion

Mark you'd like us to talk about making TomEE an umbrella or not. I think it's probably best you frame up and lead the discussion as you're the most passionate about it and I won't do it justice. I'd like to suggest that we give it two weeks. If the conversation dies out, we need to read it

Re: Let's do better

All, I followed what David calls "incidents" or "childish" quite closely in the past. Why? Cause such situations are quite familiar to me. I've been there thousands of times and what I can tell for granted is that non of these situations are neither "incidents" nor "childish". As a matter of

Re: Let's do better

+1 words - and especially brief once as emails - are just a mapping from the reality to some 'transport mechanism' (Claude Shannon sender theoreme anyone?). And of course each 'map' is a huge simplification from the reality and thus prone to be misinterpreted. The important part here is that

Let's do better

Ok, community, we have to have another quick talk and then hopefully we can go back to being awesome. This thread got very negative and bares a striking resemblance to the "Suffocating Development Environment" thread from the June 27th incident. Yes, I've written about it enough times in the