geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kevan Miller <kevan.mil...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Discuss: Move Geronimo to Attic
Date Mon, 13 Mar 2017 19:46:56 GMT
"need" and "in use" does not necessarily translate into community. The need
for the geronimo components that have been discussed is not new. As far as
I can tell, so far, that has not translated into a community.

If we want to continue the project, demonstrate the community that is
needed for the project to continue. As I stated previously, a good starting
point: create a new charter for the project, identify active PMC
members/committers, and obtain board approval.

On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 12:01 PM, Mark Struberg <struberg@yahoo.de> wrote:

> Hi Alan!
>
> There are quite a few things which fit into this scenario imo.
>
> I think we really miss some 'toolbox project' for EE components at the ASF.
> There was a tendency to make all those projects own TLPs for some time.
> But that approach simply doesn't scale, and we end up with the same people
> in most of those projects anyway.
> So moving the ones with lower activity into a common TLP would solve this
> problem. Geronimo could probably become this project.
>
> There are a lot old EE folks around which have tremendous knowledge. And
> there are certain technologies which are really cool, but have the
> classical EE-lifecycle up-down in terms of activity.
> That + the already existing components could be a great chance.
>
> As you already said yourself: the terms of the big fat EE servers is over.
> But nevertheless the technology and requirement behind most of the single
> parts is still valid and often unbeaten.
> But nowadays it's more about making it easy to plug & play those
> technology libs together more freely as they are needed. Thus moving the
> focus on maintaining the components and not the server could be really
> appreciated by the community.
>
> You said there will be community if there is a need. I fully agree, and
> even more I see a need for those parts.
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
> > Am 12.03.2017 um 19:15 schrieb Alan Cabrera <list@toolazydogs.com>:
> >
> > After a good night’s sleep, I re-read this thread and I’ll respond
> without trying to guide you in where and how you decide to go with your
> efforts; thanks in advance for letting me reboot my reply.  :)
> >
> > Any pivot that this community decides upon, will have to be justified to
> the ASF board.  We will need to explain what will be different and justify
> how it will generate sustainable community activity.  With regards to that,
> I have two general concerns:
> >       • Will this this specific endeavor generate any new sustainable
> community activity?
> >       • Will any new activity of this specific endeavor represent
> activity that is unique to Geronimo or are we doing the chores of other
> projects to provide the appearance of activity?
> > The current level activity, is due to spec maintenance for downstream
> dependencies and we must admit that it is quite low.  Being an upstream
> “aggregator” does not provide appreciable added value at the cost of the
> doubled administration.  The specter of duplicate work will, in reality,
> never arise; this de facto efficiency is due to the awesomeness of the ASL
> 2.0 license.  The case for being an aggregator weakens even more given the
> fact that there just isn't a lot of work involved in maintaining specs.
> >
> > Things aren’t much better for the shared sub-systems.  If there was
> something compelling that needed to be done on the shared sub-systems, it
> would have been begun already; given the industry’s penchant for greenfield
> development (NIH) I doubt they will ever be revamped.
> >
> > This is why I went on my “need” soapbox.  Some new need must be found
> for Geronimo to provide.
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> > Alan
> >
> >
> >> On Mar 9, 2017, at 8:49 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> I have quite a hard time to understand why it is an issue having a
> project led by the aggregation of others and not by itself? Assume one sec
> we close Geronimo or it doesnt exist, then we'll move the bit of code in
> one of the project - let say tomee - and tomee will becomes the exact same
> kind of project. The alternative is to split in a lot of small projects but
> as mentionned a lot of overlap is in these projects in term of forces and
> it doesn't work really better, it just multiply the work load for each
> contributor. That's why I think G is not a bad solution as it is today.
> Scope surely needs to be refined like Mark started to do and objectives are
> clearly a bit different than a project pushing its own server/solution but
> I think there is a space for it and for Apache I think it is saner this way.
> >>
> >>
> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> @rmannibucau |  Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn | JavaEE Factory
> >>
> >> 2017-03-09 17:01 GMT+01:00 Alan Cabrera <list@toolazydogs.com>:
> >> It has been my personal experience that need is the catalyst for a
> vibrant OSS project.  The product and community spring forth from that.
> Adopting an “if we build it they will come” tactic does not usually result
> in success.  Rather than rummaging through the trunk to see what bits
> people might be attracted to, maybe it might be better to look at the
> existing JEE-related OSS communities out there and ask “what need are they
> not fulfilling?”
> >>
> >> That would answer passersby’s questions of “why would I be interested
> in this project?”
> >>
> >> That would be a slam dunk to present to the ASF board, “Geronimo is now
> focused on fulfilling a new need, X”.
> >>
> >> What unfulfilled need is out there?
> >>
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Alan
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>> On Mar 9, 2017, at 7:04 AM, Mark Struberg <struberg@yahoo.de> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I totally agree.
> >>>
> >>> But interest from the community is always a product of a good product
> and feature roadmap.
> >>> Without any good product you will not be able to build a sustainable
> community around it.
> >>>
> >>> Of course there are many things which can trash a community despite a
> good product. But without product there is no community.
> >>> At the end we are not here only because the people are great, but
> because we see a benefit in the product we create in this project - AND the
> people are great ;)
> >>>
> >>> So my first goal was to identify the features which might be of
> interest.
> >>> The next step is to check whether there is enough community interest
> in those features or whether we could move then to another community.
> Ideally with still using the org.apache.geronimo groupId and packages.
> Otherwise it would be quite some problem for the users.
> >>>
> >>> LieGrue,
> >>> strub
> >>>
> >>>> Am 09.03.2017 um 14:46 schrieb Alex Karasulu <akarasulu@apache.org>:
> >>>>
> >>>> I think more important than whether or not JEE is popular (or
> whatever along those lines), are the questions about community health and
> is the PMC still capable of fulfilling its duties.
> >>>>
> >>>> My 2 cents,
> >>>> --Alex
> >>>>
> >>>> On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 12:08 PM, Mark Struberg <struberg@yahoo.de>
> wrote:
> >>>> Romain and I went through the Geronimo SVN and made a list of which
> components are used by other projects.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Useful Geronimo components from https://svn.apache.org/repos/
> asf/geronimo/
> >>>>
> >>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/KEYS
> >>>>
> >>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/components/txmanager
> >>>>        • TomEE (txmgr+connector)
> >>>>        • Meecrowave (txmgr)
> >>>>        • Aries (txmgr)
> >>>>
> >>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/components/
> geronimo-schema-javaee_6
> >>>>
> >>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/genesis/
> >>>>        • Maven parents for geronimo-specs
> >>>>
> >>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/javamail/
> >>>>        • TomEE as delivery
> >>>>        • Lot of standalone
> >>>>        • -> we can ask Hendrik pby
> >>>>
> >>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/specs/
> >>>>        • TomEE
> >>>>        • OpenWebBeans
> >>>>        • Meecrowave
> >>>>        • OpenJPA
> >>>>        • Johnzon
> >>>>        • BatchEE
> >>>>        • Karaf
> >>>>        • Aries
> >>>>        • Tons of external customer projects which don’t want to
use
> some official javax jars due to licensing concerns
> >>>>
> >>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/xbean/
> >>>>        • TomEE
> >>>>        • OpenWebBeans
> >>>>        • Meecrowave
> >>>>        • Aries
> >>>>        • Karaf
> >>>>        • OpenJPA
> >>>>        • CXF (supported)
> >>>>
> >>>> Osgi-locator too but guess this one can drop and belong to karaf or
> servicemix.
> >>>> Q: well we need the osgi locator in our geronimo-specs, isn’t?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I've created a google doc. Just ping me if you want to edit something
> and I'll share it.
> >>>>
> >>>> David, you mentioned JASPIC. I could not find that even. Is this
> inside the geronimo-server probably?
> >>>> Are there other gems which are not maintained as components but just
> inside geronimo?
> >>>>
> >>>> txs and LieGrue,
> >>>> strub
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> Am 09.03.2017 um 08:44 schrieb David Jencks <
> david.a.jencks@gmail.com>:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 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 |  Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn | JavaEE
Factory
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> 2017-03-09 5:13 GMT+01:00 Matt Hogstrom <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
> >>>>>> +1-919-656-0564
> >>>>>> PGP Key: 0x90ECB270
> >>>>>> Facebook  LinkedIn  Twitter
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> "I’m smart enough to know how dumb I am."
> >>>>>> -  Hogstrom
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Mar 9, 2017, at 08:47, Jason Dillon <jdillon@apache.org>
wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On March 8, 2017 at 10:44:45 AM, Mark Struberg (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
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Best Regards,
> >>>> -- Alex
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>

Mime
View raw message