In this case, shouldn't we want to merge this PR in a 'jdf-quickstart' branch ?

As the Jira issue title says "Add Arquillian Showcase to Quickstart", your previous opinion made total sense to me in this context: "Historically, we've been removing all other container Maven profiles from code as we did community -> product conversion(take RichFaces for example). If Arquillian Showcase is going from Arquillian org (community) into JDF (product), we should follow the same path."

Em 14/08/13 05:09, Karel Piwko escreveu:

This might be a stupid question, but I though that removing of other
containers/build tools should happen on JDF level, not as a part of
arquillian.org. While most of the changes makes sense to have upstream as well
to make fork closer to upstream, I can't agree with removal of profiles and
build tools in upstream. Shouldn't JDF rather fork and Arquillian update
Showcase based on a part of JDF work?

For Arquillian Showcase in upstream it is definitely reasonable to show other
possibilities, like GlassFish or Ivy. Arquillian is not tied to JBoss.

Karel

On Tue, 13 Aug 2013 13:11:57 -0300
Rafael Benevides <benevides@redhat.com> wrote:

Hi all,

I sent the following PR 
https://github.com/arquillian/arquillian-showcase/pull/17 for an earlier 
review. SO PLEASE DON'T MERGE IT YET.

I made most changes under the cdi/ folder and that's were you should focus.

Some changes:

- Removed BOMs project/folder
- Removed parent project/folder - Quickstarts should be treated as 
standalone
- Removed gradlew, ant + ivy
- Removed other containers profile and keep only arq-jbossas-managed and 
arq-jbossas-remote (removed -7 on the profile name)
- Added license headers and Readme.md
- Make cdi/pom.xml follow JDF guidelines.
- Update GAV to 
org.jboss.quickstarts.wfk:jboss-arquillian-showcase-cdi:2.4.0-redhat-SNAPSHOT
- Minor other changes

I'll appreciate any feedbacks on this since I'll apply the same changes 
to all other folders/quickstarts