Re: [RESULTS] Merge Pull Request 123 - MicroProfile JWT support

[Romain Manni-Bucau]

http://tomee.apache.org/community/sources.html

side note: github is just a proxy for us until we migrate to gitbox which
is ~basically an asf repo on github.


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


2018-05-02 15:20 GMT+02:00 Matthew Broadhead :

> sorry for the newb question but are there instructions on how to build
> 7.0.5? (mainly repo root location).  there is this
> http://tomee.apache.org/dev/building-from-source.html but we are using
> github now?
>
>
>
> On 22/04/18 20:50, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
>
>> Hi guys,
>>
>> We didn't discuss much the PR technically because there were more
>> important
>> topic to discuss and we therefore never hit the technical point but
>> since it has been merged 7 days ago there is no activity at all on that
>> code and it has a few blockers/downsides:
>>
>> 1. we don't build anymore because code uses java 8 and master (coming
>> 7.0.5) must still be java 7 from what we discussed - so we don't have
>> snapshots anymore
>> 2. we don't build anymore because the merged PR is wrongly setup (copy
>> paste from bval tck module for the suite which leads to a failing surefire
>> launching)
>> 3. the mp-jwt module is not setup to be tested (linked to 2) so we
>> actually
>> don't have any coverage for that which doesn't enable us to release it yet
>> 4. (this one is not blocking) the code is not fully ready to be released
>> (the config is hardcoded in
>> https://github.com/apache/tomee/blob/master/mp-jwt/src/main/
>> java/org/apache/tomee/microprofile/jwt/config/JWTAuthContext
>> InfoProvider.java#L33),
>> some @WebFilter should be removed to avoid to have twice the same filter
>> etc...
>>
>> Personally I'm quite keen to drop it from master and keep the work on
>> fb_tomee8 to be able to release a 8.0.0 ASAP. It drops the java 8 issue
>> and
>> the maven toolchain setup requirement.
>> Then we have two options:
>>
>> A. drop that code and use geronimo-jwt-auth-impl
>> B. make this code release ready (integrated to tomee config probably +
>> cleaned up)
>>
>> I indeed prefer A for consistency but you can go B if you want, most
>> important is to fix 1.
>>
>>
>>
>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>>  | Old Blog
>>  | Github <
>> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
>> LinkedIn  | Book
>> > high-performance>
>>
>>
>> 2018-04-10 14:41 GMT+02:00 Richard Monson-Haefel > >:
>>
>> Good to see the process work!
>>>
>>> On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 9:12 PM David Blevins 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Officially closing the vote.  Thanks for the patience everyone.  This one
 needed some good discussion and a bit of extra time.

 +1s
 Andy Gumbrecht
 Bruno Baptista
 David Blevins
 Gurkan Erdogdu
 Ivan Junckes Filho
 Jean-Louis Monteiro
 Jonathan Gallimore
 Otávio Gonçalves de Santana
 Richard Monson-Haefel
 Rudy De Busscher
 Thiago Veronezi

 0s
 Matthew Broadhead

 -1s
 Romain Manni-Bucau

 Vote passes with eleven +1s, one 0, and one -1.  Though this is a
 technical vote and a -1 would normally veto, after long discussion here

>>> and
>>>
 a short follow up with the board, all involved agree the -1 is not a
 true
 technical veto and not binding.  Guidance from the board was to use a -0

>>> on
>>>
 technical votes if the intent is not to veto.  I think it would be good

>>> for
>>>
 us to be extra clear if a vote is a technical vote vs consensus.

 Though it took a while to talk this one out and the vote is not

>>> unanimous,
>>>
 it is good to see the discussion and high turnout.  I think this
 reflects
 us using muscles we haven't used in a while and is an overall incredibly
 positive thing.

 Thanks to everyone who voted and participated in the community

>>> discussion!
>>>

 -David

 On Mar 18, 2018, at 5:02 PM, David Blevins 
>
 wrote:

> Jean-Louis has put a PR up for discussion for JWT Support in TomEE.
>
> - https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/123
>
> There are 35 commits spanning 27 days of work.  It's been reviewed by
>
 Andy and Rudy.  One a committer and one a contributor, which is great
 for
 us.

> There's an open question as to where the code should live in its final
>
 state: TomEE or Geronimo.  This conversation doesn't seem 

Re: [RESULTS] Merge Pull Request 123 - MicroProfile JWT support

[Matthew Broadhead]

sorry for the newb question but are there instructions on how to build 
7.0.5? (mainly repo root location).  there is this 
http://tomee.apache.org/dev/building-from-source.html but we are using 
github now?



On 22/04/18 20:50, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:

Hi guys,

We didn't discuss much the PR technically because there were more important
topic to discuss and we therefore never hit the technical point but
since it has been merged 7 days ago there is no activity at all on that
code and it has a few blockers/downsides:

1. we don't build anymore because code uses java 8 and master (coming
7.0.5) must still be java 7 from what we discussed - so we don't have
snapshots anymore
2. we don't build anymore because the merged PR is wrongly setup (copy
paste from bval tck module for the suite which leads to a failing surefire
launching)
3. the mp-jwt module is not setup to be tested (linked to 2) so we actually
don't have any coverage for that which doesn't enable us to release it yet
4. (this one is not blocking) the code is not fully ready to be released
(the config is hardcoded in
https://github.com/apache/tomee/blob/master/mp-jwt/src/main/java/org/apache/tomee/microprofile/jwt/config/JWTAuthContextInfoProvider.java#L33),
some @WebFilter should be removed to avoid to have twice the same filter
etc...

Personally I'm quite keen to drop it from master and keep the work on
fb_tomee8 to be able to release a 8.0.0 ASAP. It drops the java 8 issue and
the maven toolchain setup requirement.
Then we have two options:

A. drop that code and use geronimo-jwt-auth-impl
B. make this code release ready (integrated to tomee config probably +
cleaned up)

I indeed prefer A for consistency but you can go B if you want, most
important is to fix 1.



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


2018-04-10 14:41 GMT+02:00 Richard Monson-Haefel :


Good to see the process work!

On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 9:12 PM David Blevins 
wrote:


Officially closing the vote.  Thanks for the patience everyone.  This one
needed some good discussion and a bit of extra time.

+1s
Andy Gumbrecht
Bruno Baptista
David Blevins
Gurkan Erdogdu
Ivan Junckes Filho
Jean-Louis Monteiro
Jonathan Gallimore
Otávio Gonçalves de Santana
Richard Monson-Haefel
Rudy De Busscher
Thiago Veronezi

0s
Matthew Broadhead

-1s
Romain Manni-Bucau

Vote passes with eleven +1s, one 0, and one -1.  Though this is a
technical vote and a -1 would normally veto, after long discussion here

and

a short follow up with the board, all involved agree the -1 is not a true
technical veto and not binding.  Guidance from the board was to use a -0

on

technical votes if the intent is not to veto.  I think it would be good

for

us to be extra clear if a vote is a technical vote vs consensus.

Though it took a while to talk this one out and the vote is not

unanimous,

it is good to see the discussion and high turnout.  I think this reflects
us using muscles we haven't used in a while and is an overall incredibly
positive thing.

Thanks to everyone who voted and participated in the community

discussion!


-David


On Mar 18, 2018, at 5:02 PM, David Blevins 

wrote:

Jean-Louis has put a PR up for discussion for JWT Support in TomEE.

- https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/123

There are 35 commits spanning 27 days of work.  It's been reviewed by

Andy and Rudy.  One a committer and one a contributor, which is great for
us.

There's an open question as to where the code should live in its final

state: TomEE or Geronimo.  This conversation doesn't seem conclusive

after

12 days.  It's ok for us not to agree, but we should have more votes so
there is a clear outcome and we are acting as a community to our best
ability.

Vote: Merge Pull Request 123?

+1  Yes, let's do it
+-0 Abstain
-1  No, don't put this code in TomEE


Out of respect for the conversation, this is not a vote of where the

code will live in its final state.  This is just a decision to merge or
not.  It would give the users something they can try, which can be

updated

by a future PR if the code does eventually move.


-David

Re: [RESULTS] Merge Pull Request 123 - MicroProfile JWT support

[Romain Manni-Bucau]

Hi guys,

We didn't discuss much the PR technically because there were more important
topic to discuss and we therefore never hit the technical point but
since it has been merged 7 days ago there is no activity at all on that
code and it has a few blockers/downsides:

1. we don't build anymore because code uses java 8 and master (coming
7.0.5) must still be java 7 from what we discussed - so we don't have
snapshots anymore
2. we don't build anymore because the merged PR is wrongly setup (copy
paste from bval tck module for the suite which leads to a failing surefire
launching)
3. the mp-jwt module is not setup to be tested (linked to 2) so we actually
don't have any coverage for that which doesn't enable us to release it yet
4. (this one is not blocking) the code is not fully ready to be released
(the config is hardcoded in
https://github.com/apache/tomee/blob/master/mp-jwt/src/main/java/org/apache/tomee/microprofile/jwt/config/JWTAuthContextInfoProvider.java#L33),
some @WebFilter should be removed to avoid to have twice the same filter
etc...

Personally I'm quite keen to drop it from master and keep the work on
fb_tomee8 to be able to release a 8.0.0 ASAP. It drops the java 8 issue and
the maven toolchain setup requirement.
Then we have two options:

A. drop that code and use geronimo-jwt-auth-impl
B. make this code release ready (integrated to tomee config probably +
cleaned up)

I indeed prefer A for consistency but you can go B if you want, most
important is to fix 1.



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


2018-04-10 14:41 GMT+02:00 Richard Monson-Haefel :

> Good to see the process work!
>
> On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 9:12 PM David Blevins 
> wrote:
>
> > Officially closing the vote.  Thanks for the patience everyone.  This one
> > needed some good discussion and a bit of extra time.
> >
> > +1s
> > Andy Gumbrecht
> > Bruno Baptista
> > David Blevins
> > Gurkan Erdogdu
> > Ivan Junckes Filho
> > Jean-Louis Monteiro
> > Jonathan Gallimore
> > Otávio Gonçalves de Santana
> > Richard Monson-Haefel
> > Rudy De Busscher
> > Thiago Veronezi
> >
> > 0s
> > Matthew Broadhead
> >
> > -1s
> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> >
> > Vote passes with eleven +1s, one 0, and one -1.  Though this is a
> > technical vote and a -1 would normally veto, after long discussion here
> and
> > a short follow up with the board, all involved agree the -1 is not a true
> > technical veto and not binding.  Guidance from the board was to use a -0
> on
> > technical votes if the intent is not to veto.  I think it would be good
> for
> > us to be extra clear if a vote is a technical vote vs consensus.
> >
> > Though it took a while to talk this one out and the vote is not
> unanimous,
> > it is good to see the discussion and high turnout.  I think this reflects
> > us using muscles we haven't used in a while and is an overall incredibly
> > positive thing.
> >
> > Thanks to everyone who voted and participated in the community
> discussion!
> >
> >
> > -David
> >
> > > On Mar 18, 2018, at 5:02 PM, David Blevins 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Jean-Louis has put a PR up for discussion for JWT Support in TomEE.
> > >
> > > - https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/123
> > >
> > > There are 35 commits spanning 27 days of work.  It's been reviewed by
> > Andy and Rudy.  One a committer and one a contributor, which is great for
> > us.
> > >
> > > There's an open question as to where the code should live in its final
> > state: TomEE or Geronimo.  This conversation doesn't seem conclusive
> after
> > 12 days.  It's ok for us not to agree, but we should have more votes so
> > there is a clear outcome and we are acting as a community to our best
> > ability.
> > >
> > > Vote: Merge Pull Request 123?
> > >
> > > +1  Yes, let's do it
> > > +-0 Abstain
> > > -1  No, don't put this code in TomEE
> > >
> > >
> > > Out of respect for the conversation, this is not a vote of where the
> > code will live in its final state.  This is just a decision to merge or
> > not.  It would give the users something they can try, which can be
> updated
> > by a future PR if the code does eventually move.
> > >
> > >
> > > -David
> > >
> >
> >
>

Re: [RESULTS] Merge Pull Request 123 - MicroProfile JWT support

[Richard Monson-Haefel]

Good to see the process work!

On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 9:12 PM David Blevins 
wrote:

> Officially closing the vote.  Thanks for the patience everyone.  This one
> needed some good discussion and a bit of extra time.
>
> +1s
> Andy Gumbrecht
> Bruno Baptista
> David Blevins
> Gurkan Erdogdu
> Ivan Junckes Filho
> Jean-Louis Monteiro
> Jonathan Gallimore
> Otávio Gonçalves de Santana
> Richard Monson-Haefel
> Rudy De Busscher
> Thiago Veronezi
>
> 0s
> Matthew Broadhead
>
> -1s
> Romain Manni-Bucau
>
> Vote passes with eleven +1s, one 0, and one -1.  Though this is a
> technical vote and a -1 would normally veto, after long discussion here and
> a short follow up with the board, all involved agree the -1 is not a true
> technical veto and not binding.  Guidance from the board was to use a -0 on
> technical votes if the intent is not to veto.  I think it would be good for
> us to be extra clear if a vote is a technical vote vs consensus.
>
> Though it took a while to talk this one out and the vote is not unanimous,
> it is good to see the discussion and high turnout.  I think this reflects
> us using muscles we haven't used in a while and is an overall incredibly
> positive thing.
>
> Thanks to everyone who voted and participated in the community discussion!
>
>
> -David
>
> > On Mar 18, 2018, at 5:02 PM, David Blevins 
> wrote:
> >
> > Jean-Louis has put a PR up for discussion for JWT Support in TomEE.
> >
> > - https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/123
> >
> > There are 35 commits spanning 27 days of work.  It's been reviewed by
> Andy and Rudy.  One a committer and one a contributor, which is great for
> us.
> >
> > There's an open question as to where the code should live in its final
> state: TomEE or Geronimo.  This conversation doesn't seem conclusive after
> 12 days.  It's ok for us not to agree, but we should have more votes so
> there is a clear outcome and we are acting as a community to our best
> ability.
> >
> > Vote: Merge Pull Request 123?
> >
> > +1  Yes, let's do it
> > +-0 Abstain
> > -1  No, don't put this code in TomEE
> >
> >
> > Out of respect for the conversation, this is not a vote of where the
> code will live in its final state.  This is just a decision to merge or
> not.  It would give the users something they can try, which can be updated
> by a future PR if the code does eventually move.
> >
> >
> > -David
> >
>
>

[RESULTS] Merge Pull Request 123 - MicroProfile JWT support

[David Blevins]

Officially closing the vote.  Thanks for the patience everyone.  This one 
needed some good discussion and a bit of extra time.

+1s
Andy Gumbrecht
Bruno Baptista
David Blevins
Gurkan Erdogdu
Ivan Junckes Filho
Jean-Louis Monteiro
Jonathan Gallimore
Otávio Gonçalves de Santana
Richard Monson-Haefel
Rudy De Busscher
Thiago Veronezi

0s
Matthew Broadhead

-1s
Romain Manni-Bucau

Vote passes with eleven +1s, one 0, and one -1.  Though this is a technical 
vote and a -1 would normally veto, after long discussion here and a short 
follow up with the board, all involved agree the -1 is not a true technical 
veto and not binding.  Guidance from the board was to use a -0 on technical 
votes if the intent is not to veto.  I think it would be good for us to be 
extra clear if a vote is a technical vote vs consensus.

Though it took a while to talk this one out and the vote is not unanimous, it 
is good to see the discussion and high turnout.  I think this reflects us using 
muscles we haven't used in a while and is an overall incredibly positive thing.

Thanks to everyone who voted and participated in the community discussion!


-David

> On Mar 18, 2018, at 5:02 PM, David Blevins  wrote:
> 
> Jean-Louis has put a PR up for discussion for JWT Support in TomEE.  
> 
> - https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/123
> 
> There are 35 commits spanning 27 days of work.  It's been reviewed by Andy 
> and Rudy.  One a committer and one a contributor, which is great for us.
> 
> There's an open question as to where the code should live in its final state: 
> TomEE or Geronimo.  This conversation doesn't seem conclusive after 12 days.  
> It's ok for us not to agree, but we should have more votes so there is a 
> clear outcome and we are acting as a community to our best ability.
> 
> Vote: Merge Pull Request 123?
> 
> +1  Yes, let's do it
> +-0 Abstain
> -1  No, don't put this code in TomEE
> 
> 
> Out of respect for the conversation, this is not a vote of where the code 
> will live in its final state.  This is just a decision to merge or not.  It 
> would give the users something they can try, which can be updated by a future 
> PR if the code does eventually move.
> 
> 
> -David
>