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 16:30:42 GMT
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.

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