geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Jencks <david.a.jen...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Discuss: Move Geronimo to Attic
Date Thu, 09 Mar 2017 07:44:44 GMT
I go back and forth on whether to shut G down completely.  Perhaps it would be useful to inventory
which parts are used by which other projects? Off the top of my head….

Specs …. who uses G’s and who has their own?

Components…. I think there are several users of the transaction manager, I don’t know
about the connector framework, and I’m pretty sure no one uses my jaspic implementation.
 The TM is stable but now that faster than spinning rust persistent memory is popular the
logger could probably be rewritten to be much faster.

xbean …. tomee I believe, anyone else?  Does activemq still use xbean-spring?  Knowing more
about osgi now I might be able to gets xbean-blueprint to work:-)

yoko is used by IBM, I doubt anyone else will get all excited about CORBA and start contributing.

Any other bits being used?

If we kept G around in a reduced state, how will we maintain enough interest to file the board
reports?  Some days  I think I might have enough interest and some days not.

If we did not shut down the whole project would we mark the removed bits (server primarily)
as not being developed or move them to the attic?

thanks
david jencks

> On Mar 8, 2017, at 11:15 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> A valid point is activity related to G happens elsewhere, However elsewhere is not "tomee"
which would make things simple to move but A, B, C so shutting down G is likely the easiest
solution for G itself but also the worse for all its dependent projects - and ASF consistency
since G is now seen as the owner of specs, xbean etc....Today G is the result of communities
and I don't see it as a bad thing even if not common @ASF. It allows new interactions with
sometimes completely different area of knowledge which is actually great and can't happen
elsewhere IMHO (the dead of G would mean fork per project probably).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog <https://blog-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com/>
| Old Blog <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau>
| LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | JavaEE Factory <https://javaeefactory-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com/>
> 2017-03-09 5:13 GMT+01:00 Matt Hogstrom <matt@hogstrom.org <mailto:matt@hogstrom.org>>:
> I’ve monitored G for several years since my departure.  For me, JEE is not my main
area of focus and as such, I’ve invested little time in the project apart from reading the
e-mail threads.  This is a community decision and posting the discussion to dev@ is the right
venue.
> 
> As an inactive member I don’t have a strong vote, but, my observation is that most
of the community has moved on and there is little activity.  If those that are still active
want to keep going then God’s speed.
> 
> Matt Hogstrom
> matt@hogstrom.org <mailto:matt@hogstrom.org>
> +1-919-656-0564
> PGP Key: 0x90ECB270
> Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/matt.hogstrom>  LinkedIn <http://www.linkedin.com/in/mhogstrom>
 Twitter <http://www.twitter.com/hogstrom>
> 
> "I’m smart enough to know how dumb I am."
> -  Hogstrom
> 
> 
> 
>> On Mar 9, 2017, at 08:47, Jason Dillon <jdillon@apache.org <mailto:jdillon@apache.org>>
wrote:
>> 
>> On March 8, 2017 at 10:44:45 AM, Mark Struberg (struberg@yahoo.de <mailto:struberg@yahoo.de>)
wrote:
>>> Alan, I understand that you don't want to put much more energy into this project.
That is totally understandable and fine. 
>>> But while you are PMC chair you still cannot declare that the project is dead
as long as there are enough PMC members still active to keep the project going. 
>> 
>> Mark, I agree with Alan and Kevan, though put into my own words I think the project
and community is no longer viable (and has not been for a while).  I do believe there are
still useful aspects to the project, but I don’t think its enough to leave on its own.
>> 
>> We can certainly wait for more PMC members to chime in if they are still monitoring.
 As Jeff recommended I’m including the private@ list for PMC folks that may not be paying
as much attention to the dev@ list.
>> 
>>> Before we dump the project I suggest we start with an analysis of where we are
right now. 
>>> 
>>> What about starting look into 
>>> .) Who is still active and willing to continue Geronimo as a ee-commons project?

>> 
>> So far I’ve not really seen anyone over the past days of communication about this.
 But we’ll see.
>> 
>> —jason
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> .) Which project parts of the project are of some shared interest and might be
good to get some maintenance love and some realistic chance that this is gonna happening?

>> 
>> I can’t speak for the others, but I have zero interested in putting any love in
to any of what is presently here.
>> 
>> I will defer to others to explain if they feel otherwise, though I do recall some
chatter on private@ but will probably need those folks to re-post to dev@ to include that
discussion.
>> 
>> —jason
>> 
> 
> 


Mime
View raw message