geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] implement jakarta spec apis
Date Sun, 05 May 2019 18:49:32 GMT
Of course there will be no releases until the EF has a common understanding how to proceed
on their side. After all the main goal is compatibility amongst vendors.

I'd actually even would avoid to push snapshots to our repository.apache.org ...

This is mainly for understanding how far we come, what the limits are and what other options
we have.

LieGrue,
strub


> Am 05.05.2019 um 19:35 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau@gmail.com>:
> 
> Ok.
> 
> Can we agree to take this discussion back and hold any release - no issue with snaps
- until it is clarified?
> 
> Le dim. 5 mai 2019 à 18:45, Mark Struberg <struberg@yahoo.de> a écrit :
> I'm not even sure whether they yet got all the necessary IP to release anything.
> 
> LieGrue,
> strub
> 
> 
> > Am 05.05.2019 um 18:39 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau@gmail.com>:
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Le dim. 5 mai 2019 à 18:30, Mark Struberg <struberg@yahoo.de> a écrit :
> > I'm not mandating jakarta in the groupId, but it should something else than the
current one.
> > Because otw we would have them completely mixed up in the same folder. That's not
nice.
> > 
> > Depends, that said happy to just replace specs by jakarta if it works for you better
(org.apache.geronimo.jakarta). I just dont want jakarta-specs or _spec-xxx as before, always
looked fishy and almost wrong even if I get where it comes from.
> > 
> > Btw, what is our status on having eclipse releasing api under asf2 license?
> > 
> > I dont want us to invest in something we drop like in 2 weeks and sounds it can
be for most of specs. Any page tracking that?
> > 
> > 
> > LieGrue
> > strub
> > 
> > > Am 05.05.2019 um 18:20 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau@gmail.com>:
> > > 
> > > We dont need jakarta in the gav at all.
> > > 
> > > Why not org.apache.geronimo.spec:servlet:4.0.1?
> > > 
> > > As a reminder specs means jakarta already and there id jo ambiguity between
jakarta and javaee thanks the version. 
> > > 
> > > That said if we move to git it id even physically clearer.
> > > 
> > > Finally servlet is a bad example cause owned at tomcat for apache i think.
We should absolutely stop duplicating them, it pollutes user land for no gain IMHO.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Le dim. 5 mai 2019 à 16:28, Mark Struberg <struberg@yahoo.de> a écrit
:
> > > Eclipse itself probably doesn't yet have all the IP themselves. This first
needs to be clarified. Since all those legal questions have been dealt with behind closed
doors we simply have no idea.
> > > 
> > > But we do have clean-room implemented APIs under ALv2 over here at Geronimo.
> > > And we can move this ourselves without having to wait for anybody.
> > > 
> > > LieGrue,
> > > strub
> > > 
> > > 
> > > > Am 05.05.2019 um 16:12 schrieb Bernd Eckenfels <ecki@zusammenkunft.net>:
> > > > 
> > > > I wonder if you need that going forward for Jakarta Specs, they could
just be distributed by Eclipse directly? Having said that, if this is not the case I would
at least remove „geronimo-“ from the artifact Id?
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > --
> > > > http://bernd.eckenfels.net
> > > >  
> > > > Von: Mark Struberg <struberg@yahoo.de>
> > > > Gesendet: Sonntag, Mai 5, 2019 4:09 PM
> > > > An: geronimo-dev
> > > > Betreff: Re: [DISCUSS] implement jakarta spec apis
> > > >  
> > > > For now I've used the following patterns: 
> > > > 
> > > > <groupId>org.apache.geronimo.jakarta-specs</groupId> 
> > > > because specs and jakarta-specs should be in a clearly separated folder.

> > > > 
> > > > <artifactId>geronimo-jakarta-servlet_spec</artifactId> 
> > > > because 'jakarta' should be in the jar name 
> > > > 
> > > > <version>4.0_1-SNAPSHOT</version> 
> > > > 4.0 is for servlet-4.0, 1 is the patch level. 
> > > > 
> > > > I'd NOT do a release or push to our snapshots repo until in about 2 weeks
when the modus operandi is clear within the Jakarta community. 
> > > > 
> > > > LieGrue, 
> > > > strub 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > > Am 05.05.2019 um 08:55 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau@gmail.com>:

> > > > > 
> > > > > Do we also want to clean our gav? Artifact=spec, major.minor version
=spec version 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Ex: org.apache.geronimo.specs:jsp:2.1.1 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Le sam. 4 mai 2019 à 21:49, Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau@gmail.com>
a écrit : 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Le sam. 4 mai 2019 à 21:44, Mark Struberg <struberg@yahoo.de>
a écrit : 
> > > > > The problem is that in a git repo you can only release all at once.
That means we would need to have a single git repo for each and every spec. That will be quite
many... 
> > > > > 
> > > > > No, maven plugins was a monorepo for years and then they split. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > That said i proposed that exactly for that. At the end the release
process is more on jira dev etc, one or N repos does not compress that time. Release prepare/perform
is very fast on these repo so one or 100 is likely the same for release manager and seems
it will also enable better osgi support and probably - hopefully - enable servicemix to stop
forking the fork ;). 
> > > > > 
> > > > > I also see svn as legacy now gitbox is mainstream and people contributing
like to see their name in - I expect maybe some help for new spec as we got for each new version.

> > > > > Fixed are generally trivial there and a good reason to use github.

> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > LieGrue, 
> > > > > strub 
> > > > > 
> > > > > > Am 04.05.2019 um 21:35 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau@gmail.com>:

> > > > > > 
> > > > > > AFAIK we dont have limitations there and can do share stuff
outside with jgit - but it is very rare - so probably sane to unify all repo to git. In particular
since we will not do all specs probably. Cxf already moved to jakarta spec so we dont need
jaxrs stack for instance, same for cdi, bval,... So we wil reduce a lot what we fork IMHO.

> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Le sam. 4 mai 2019 à 21:12, Mark Struberg <struberg@yahoo.de>
a écrit : 
> > > > > > I’d keep that in svn because of the tons of modules. 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Lg, 
> > > > > > Strub 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Am 04.05.2019 um 19:28 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau@gmail.com>:

> > > > > > 
> > > > > >> We mainly fork for legal reasons and defaults so name is
probably not critical while we respect module names. 
> > > > > >> 
> > > > > >> Btw do we do it in gitbox? Svn had some limitations by the
past for contributions. 
> > > > > >> 
> > > > > >> Le sam. 4 mai 2019 à 17:47, Raymond Auge <raymond.auge@liferay.com>
a écrit : 
> > > > > >> One thing to consider is there may be cases where it is
desirable to retain the javax API alongside some extra jakarta packages & types. 
> > > > > >> 
> > > > > >> For example, for JAX-RS you may wish to add some newly defined
jakarta types (part of a new spec) which interact over the original javax API. 
> > > > > >> 
> > > > > >> The result might be that "Jakarta EE REST" (a fictitious
name for next JAX-RS) might contain a subset of packages which, in combination with JAXRS
v2.1, also qualifies as "Jakarata EE Rest". 
> > > > > >> 
> > > > > >> - Ray 
> > > > > >> 
> > > > > >> On Sat, May 4, 2019 at 11:26 AM Raymond Auge <raymond.auge@liferay.com>
wrote: 
> > > > > >> so is this a matter of forking all the current specs into
the new namespace? Or is the intention to completely change the packages in-place? 
> > > > > >> 
> > > > > >> - Ray 
> > > > > >> 
> > > > > >> On Fri, May 3, 2019 at 1:58 PM Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau@gmail.com>
wrote: 
> > > > > >> Hmm 
> > > > > >> 
> > > > > >> My understanding was it was getting under eclipse license
as well and was fully donated but can have missed some details. 
> > > > > >> 
> > > > > >> If we cant reuse them let's just create new ones and fix
module name for others. 
> > > > > >> 
> > > > > >> specs/ is fine since it is the same for us IMHO 
> > > > > >> 
> > > > > >> Le ven. 3 mai 2019 à 18:24, Mark Struberg <struberg@yahoo.de>
a écrit : 
> > > > > >> No, it is not the same. microprofile specs are licensed
under ALv2 and we know all the legal details. 
> > > > > >> For the EE specs this is by far not the same. We don't even
know exactly what parts did yet get donated by Oracle to the EF. 
> > > > > >> 
> > > > > >> LieGrue, 
> > > > > >> strub 
> > > > > >> 
> > > > > >> 
> > > > > >> > Am 03.05.2019 um 18:12 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau@gmail.com>:

> > > > > >> > 
> > > > > >> > Hi 
> > > > > >> > 
> > > > > >> > Idnt it the exact same as for microprofile? So we dont
do? 
> > > > > >> > 
> > > > > >> > Le ven. 3 mai 2019 à 16:21, Mark Struberg <struberg@yahoo.de>
a écrit : 
> > > > > >> > I've started tinkering something under specs/branches/jakarta.

> > > > > >> > It's wip but have to rush out for a few hours now.

> > > > > >> > Will continue later today. 
> > > > > >> > 
> > > > > >> > LieGrue, 
> > > > > >> > strub 
> > > > > >> > 
> > > > > >> > 
> > > > > >> > > Am 03.05.2019 um 15:50 schrieb Mark Struberg <struberg@yahoo.de>:

> > > > > >> > > 
> > > > > >> > > hi folks! 
> > > > > >> > > 
> > > > > >> > > You might have read todays post from Mike Milinkovich.

> > > > > >> > > 
> > > > > >> > > https://eclipse-foundation.blog/2019/05/03/jakarta-ee-java-trademarks/

> > > > > >> > > 
> > > > > >> > > It basically says that Jakarta will not be able
to change a single bit in the current spec apis under the javax.* package. 
> > > > > >> > > Any change has to be done in a different package.

> > > > > >> > > The Jakarta people over at Eclipse already did
some voting and the new package name will be jakarta.* 
> > > > > >> > > 
> > > > > >> > > Thus I would like to recommend to use our IP clean
geronimo-specs to setup a new project for the EE8 specs under the jakarta.* package name.

> > > > > >> > > 
> > > > > >> > > I'll go forward and create a branch starting with
the most important specs. 
> > > > > >> > > 
> > > > > >> > > Any feedback and help is welcome! 
> > > > > >> > > 
> > > > > >> > > LieGrue, 
> > > > > >> > > strub 
> > > > > >> > > 
> > > > > >> > 
> > > > > >> 
> > > > > >> 
> > > > > >> 
> > > > > >> -- 
> > > > > >> Raymond Augé (@rotty3000) 
> > > > > >> Senior Software Architect Liferay, Inc. (@Liferay) 
> > > > > >> Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance (@OSGiAlliance)

> > > > > >> 
> > > > > >> 
> > > > > >> -- 
> > > > > >> Raymond Augé (@rotty3000) 
> > > > > >> Senior Software Architect Liferay, Inc. (@Liferay) 
> > > > > >> Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance (@OSGiAlliance)

> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > > 
> > 
> 


Mime
View raw message