David Blevins wrote:
- We have the 1.0 code which is pretty much the same as 0.9.2 with
the addition of a Web Administration Console, EJB 2.0 Local
Interface support, and an addition form of OpenEJB/Tomcat
integration scoped at just the webapp level.
Hi Dave,
Let's start with complains first and then move on to some cheers and +1's :)
I don't like the statement. I feel that OpenEJB 0.9.2 is slightly
different than the upcoming 1.0 release and as such deserves its own
version - 1.0. Well, some earlier OpenEJB releases would deserve the 1.0
release, too, but since we decided otherwise that one does surely
deserve it.
- We have the 2.0 code which is pretty much tied to Geronimo and has
none of the features that existing OpenEJB users have come to
expect: easy unit testing of ejbs; any form of tomcat integration;
easy config files; tools to validate ejbs. It does have ejb 2.1
functionality (webserivces, cmp2, mdbs).
That's great that OpenEJB 2 gives people EJB 2.1 support, but I don't
like it's nothing more and doesn't support any features of OpenEJB 1. As
it turned out we all (silently) agreed on the tight integration of
OpenEJB 2 and Geronimo, OpenEJB 2.0 should support Geronimo 1.0 without
any whistles and bells (= major changes) before certification. Once it's
done we could put our attention on things that are part of OpenEJB 1.0
and won't make into OpenEJB 2.0 - mostly the Tomcat integration, which
would lead to some OpenEJB 2.x releases. JSR 77/88 would be another
milestone to meet while in the 2.x tree.
I've been very hesitant to release anything from the OpenEJB 2.0 tree
as it is just going to work in the same way that OpenEJB 1 (0.9.2)
does. The trick is also that all the resources on the project have
focused solely on implementing 2.1 so we never seem to get to 1.0 either.
Well, not exactly. I'm the only one who left the ground and will cut it
finally. Let's see how much we can do this weekend.
GOALS
I think top priority is getting OpenEJB back in the hands of OpenEJB
users. At this point I don't think this means giving you all a 1.0,
It's not fair. How long should people wait till the next major OPenEJB
release? Another year or so? I object. There're features in OpenEJB 1.0
that should see a light as soon as possible.
you deserve the EJB 2.1 functionality you were promised and the great
things you like about 0.9.2. Further, unless we get a jump on
starting an EJB 3 implementation focused on existing OpenEJB users,
we'll be in the same position we were in on the EJB 2.1 code.
DIRECTION
Here is where we need your feedback. This project exists for you
guys, so we need to here from as many people as possible. The
more the better.
What if we just put out the 1.0 "as is" did minor bug fixes on it, but
nothing major in terms of features.
-1. See my comments above.
Admitted the 2.0 code is pretty
much Geronimo's and just left it alone for the most part.
-1. See my comments above.
And...
we start on OpenEJB 3 by taking the 1.0 (pretty much the same as
0.9.2), merging in parts of the 2.0 code, and (here is the important
part) ensuring that the entire time the code we write is code you can
use! We will never drop a feature, even temporarily. This is also
where we would develop EJB 3 compliance. We will start from code that
users are now using and always keep, maintain, and improve those
features as we add new features. Releasing early and often.
Hurray! We'll be back on track again. That deserves my +1000000!
How does that sound?
That's incredible you're asking. That's brilliant idea. Count me in when
you start development.
Here is how I am imagining we could do that technically:
1. Take the OpenEJB 1.0 code and kill all the ugly static code and
make it IoC with the gbean.org kernel. The gbean kernel is an
IoC kernel compatible with both Spring and Geronimo. So people
using OpenEJB could leverage (and write) both Spring components
and Geronimo components. See http://gbean.org
+1
It seems very natural to me to leverage a IoC, and if it's Dain's work
(gbean.org) I fully believe it's worth its time at least to give it a
shot. We'll see how much effors it will require to see if we're in the
right direction.
3. All EJB 3 work would be done as components and made available to
you in various forms of stability as things go along, meanwhile
that won't slow down the entire OpenEJB 3 set of code.
Or better, make all of the components available to download as we
envision Geronimo should work.
Again, the overall goal is to start with code you are using now and
ensure that when we take a step forward, we aren't leaving you behind
by removing things you depend on (tomcat integration, testability,
embeddibility, ease of use, etc).
That was always my goal and I think OpenEJB's, but it seems we lost
control so let's turn it back on track.
FEEDBACK
So here is where we need as many people as possible to shout out and
say "yes" or "no" or anything else you want to add.
(shouting) YES.
Is this where you want the project to go? <<<<
(I think you don't mind me telling so...)
You must be joking, right? Do you think that people really care about
OpenEJB any longer once OpenEJB itself hasn't taken care of them for so
long? I don't think so. Don't be surprised to see merely 2-3 replies tpo
your inquiry as we have already broken the rules at first. I think what
you've proposed is a way to bring people back to the project and do
everything so credit where credit's due. Geronimo is a way to do it in a
short term, but let's make it more neutral and let OpenEJB loose off
Geronimo ;)
David Blevins
Jacek
