https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo-jwt-auth.git
enjoy! Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance> 2018-03-26 11:53 GMT+02:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]>: > Ok, let's do it then. > > > Romain Manni-Bucau > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog > <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github > <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn > <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book > <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance> > > 2018-03-23 21:22 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]>: > >> Hi guys, >> >> seems there is no -1 so any objection to create the repo next week? >> >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau >> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog >> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog >> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github >> <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn >> <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book >> <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance> >> >> 2018-03-19 8:29 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]>: >> >>> +1 to host jwt-auth @G whatever tomee does. >>> >>> >>> Romain Manni-Bucau >>> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog >>> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog >>> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github >>> <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn >>> <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book >>> <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance> >>> >>> 2018-03-19 4:09 GMT+01:00 David Blevins <[email protected]>: >>> >>>> Ah. My intention was a +1 would mean "We should create new JWT module >>>> in Geronimo now, regardless of what TomEE is discussing." >>>> >>>> Not "can we ever" in a general sense, but should we do it right now. >>>> >>>> If someone would like to wait a bit longer, they should not vote +1. >>>> It could still happen later of course. >>>> >>>> >>>> -David >>>> >>>> > On Mar 18, 2018, at 7:32 PM, John D. Ament <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> > >>>> > 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 >>>> > > >>>> > >>>> >>>> >>> >> >
