Just to make sure I understand. a +1 on this to me means there may be a module created in geronimo. Maybe not. But either way it shouldn't stop what TomEE is doing.
On Sun, Mar 18, 2018 at 8:59 PM David Blevins <[email protected]> wrote: > My vote would be -0 and I hesitate even for a negative anything. > > I think the "Geronimo will do it anyway, collaborate or not" perspective > feels a bit like an ultimatum. That said, if people truly do want to move > on regardless of what happens in TomEE, that's exactly what should happen. > > I feel strongly that a project should not be obstructed by other projects > who feel ownership over an domain, be forced to collaborate, or otherwise > be stopped in their tracks. > > Here's how I'd like my vote read: > > - Waiting to see what TomEE decides or creates would be ideal in my mind, > but not necessary if there is support for moving forward > > - I wouldn't help, but I wouldn't stand in the way > > - I continue to have reservations naming reusable components after a dead > app server. I managed to have all my best efforts remain perfectly > invisible under the name "OpenEJB" and "EJB." If people want to put effort > into reforming the 15 year-old Geronimo brand, they are welcome to do so, > but I can't sign up for that again. I can't pretend this isn't a > significant obstacle. > > - I continue to feel we'd be stronger together (TomEE and Geronimo). > With these false lines making everyone have to get commit twice and hiding > our best work under a dead website and brand, we aren't getting the > strength and speed we need. > > > As long as I feel understood, not pushed into doing something I don't want > to do, I'm more than happy. > > > -David > > > On Mar 18, 2018, at 5:05 PM, David Blevins <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > Two votes are up in the TomEE community on what to do with PR #123 ( > https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/123 ). The first vote is if TomEE > should merge it. The second vote is if TomEE should attempt to extract it. > > > > It was said 3-4 times in the discussion between both communities > "geronimo will have a jwt-auth impl." This is absolutely ok, there is no > rule that two projects cannot do the same or similar thing. Apache Tamaya > exists and there is a Geronimo Config, both aim at MicroProfile Config > compliance. This is OK by ASF standards and one community is not judged > good or bad for choosing to also implement something. > > > > That said, decisions like this should be made by the project clearly. > Some people may want to move ahead now. Some people may want to wait and > see how things go with TomEE. > > > > Vote: Move ahead with creating a reusable JWT module > > > > +1 Let's get on this, now. There may be two impls, but that's ok. > > -+0 > > -1 Let's wait / maybe later / other > > > > > > -David > > > >
