geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gianny Damour <>
Subject Re: Geronimo 2.0
Date Sat, 07 Jan 2006 01:24:34 GMT
David Blevins wrote:

> On Jan 6, 2006, at 11:10 AM, David Jencks wrote:
>> Either I don't understand what is being proposed or I think it is a  
>> recipe for disaster.
>> My past experience with open source projects leads me to believe  
>> that having more than one main development area that is leading to  a 
>> release is likely to cause only confusion, not progress towards  
>> functionality.
>> In my opinion if we call head 2.0 and start adding JEE 5 features  to 
>> it, there will never be any more j2ee 1.4 releases with added  
>> functionality.  We will have a couple bug fix 1.0 releases, then a  
>> year or so while we try to finish JEE 5.  I don't think this is  
>> acceptable.
> Amen!
> We can't go from two years of development on 1.x with little to no  
> user interaction then abandon it after the first release and go back  
> into the development hole.  We need to follow through on Geronimo 1.x  
> for a few release cycles, get some user feedback, learn the lessons  
> we need to learn for a while, *then* start Geronimo 2.0.
> Now is not the time to turn our focus to the next shinny ball, now is  
> the time to focus on users of 1.x as they will need our dedication  
> before they can bring it into production.


Also, we need to think about when we need to turn to this next shinny 
ball. At this stage, I think that JEE 5 is still a shiny technology and 
the mass of the community has not yet started to transition to it. 
Hence, we need to support what people want now. Having said that, we 
need to be in an acceptable state, WRT JEE 5 features, when the 
community will ask for it; this means that we will need to improve the 
stack from a user perspective.


> There is my $0.02.
> -David

View raw message