Skip to main content
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [jms-dev] Jakarta Messaging Plan for version 3.1 (Jakarta EE 10)
To be honest, I think this issue is the most logical starting point to create a CDI based replacement to MDB: https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jms-api/issues/134. I can’t tell for sure why all those newer issues were filed.

Reza Rahman
Jakarta EE Ambassador, Author, Blogger, Speaker

Please note views expressed here are my own as an individual community member and do not reflect the views of my employer.

On May 4, 2021, at 10:50 PM, Gurkan Erdogdu <gerdogdu@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hi Ondro

  • CDI Message Consumers #244
I think that CDI based messaging and JMS messaging have different use cases. Therefore, I am not sure that having CDI Message consumers in JMS specification. 
Other features are good to have.


Regards.
Gurkan

On 5 May 2021, at 02:29, Ondro Mihályi <ondrej.mihalyi@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hi all,

I noticed that Messaging didn't submit a plan for review for Jakarta EE 10. Do we still want to submit a plan so that we can deliver a new version of JMS in EE 10?

I think that plans should have been submitted by April 15 but we may still try to submit a plan because JMS is a very important Jakarta EE specification. It wouldn't be a good message if JMS didn't get any update for EE 10, at least with very minor updates.

Because we didn't have any discussion about new features recently, we could introduce something from the roadmap outlined by David in 2019 in a github issue. I would only go after things that are rather straightforward, long overdue, and already well documented. So from the items in that issue, I suggest to consider only:
  • Annotation-Based API for Consuming Messages #243
  • CDI Message Consumers #244
  • MessagingClient #249
Additionally, we can support repeatable annotations in some cases, e.g. for JMSDestinationDefinition.

What do you think? Do you want me to start working on a plan for Messaging 3.1 that we would submit to the https://github.com/jakartaee/specifications repository?

Should we plan to add the new features as I suggested above? Or it's much more that we can handle and it's better to submit a plan just to add fixes and possibly support repeatable annotations?

What do you think?

Ondro
_______________________________________________
jms-dev mailing list
jms-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jms-dev

_______________________________________________
jms-dev mailing list
jms-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jms-dev

Back to the top