On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 9:39 AM, vaquar khan <vaquar.khan_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> +1 open source community
>
> I am sorry if it's sound bad but this is unfortunate that Oracle want to
> kill JMS .
>
> I totally agreed that we have to move to cloud computing and Micro service
> architecture However JMS has its own place ,organization will take long time
> to move out from JMS.
There are two things there... one is Microprofile.. the other is the API.
I really don't want to steal this discussion around Microprofile. We
can talk about it there.
>
>
> Regards,
> vaquar khan
>
> On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 7:59 AM, Clebert Suconic <clebert.suconic_at_gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> @Reza (and everybody else), you should follow this discussion about
>> messaging on the micro profile:
>>
>>
>> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/microprofile/slv8lk_1smU/HFcdlhWiAwAJ
>>
>> I was trying to help on making JMS 2 better, but one of the Pitfalls
>> of JMS 2, was that it would need to be fully compatible with JMS 1.1.
>> (In my book fully compatible would mean 1.3, 1.4.. not a 2.0), so a
>> lot of weight from JMS1 which was designed in a different era (10+
>> years ago is already a long time).
>>
>> I think something new is needed anyways.. Something simpler that users
>> can use and have the complexity embedded at the implementation. An API
>> that is modern, simple and cheap to be implemented.
>>
>> I really think that the message API on the Microprofile could become
>> something great...and that is already a good gathering around
>> messaging folks on an open source community.
>>
>> the discussion is open and everyone is welcome.
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 8:24 AM, reza_rahman <reza_rahman_at_lycos.com>
>> wrote:
>> > This is truly unfortunate, but I can't say I didn't suspect it will
>> > happen.
>> > For those interested, I propose we move the major functionality slated
>> > for
>> > JMS 2.1 forward through an open source community project that can be
>> > standardized as soon as possible.
>> >
>> > I will post the details on this shortly. Support from major vendors
>> > including Oracle for the comminity project would be most welcome.
>> >
>> > Sent via the Samsung Galaxy S7, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone
>> >
>> > -------- Original message --------
>> > From: Nigel Deakin <nigel.deakin_at_oracle.com>
>> > Date: 11/29/16 4:28 AM (GMT-05:00)
>> > To: users_at_jms-spec.java.net, jsr368-experts_at_jms-spec.java.net
>> > Subject: [jms-spec users] Re: The future of JMS 2.1 and Java EE 8
>> >
>> > Oracle has now asked me to announce that it will withdraw JSR 368 (JMS
>> > 2.1),
>> > in accordance with the proposed Java EE 8
>> > roadmap presented by Anil Gaur and others at JavaOne 2016 and the
>> > results of
>> > the community survey.
>> >
>> > This is also announced here:
>> > https://blogs.oracle.com/theaquarium/entry/a_quick_update_on_java
>> >
>> > Note that although JSR 368 is ending, the email group
>> > users_at_jms-spec.java.net continues for general discussion of the
>> > JMS specification. If you have general questions about the plans for
>> > Java EE
>> > 8 please use users_at_javaee-spec.java.net
>> >
>> > Nigel
>> > (JSR 368 specification lead)
>> >
>> > On 05/10/2016 09:47, Nigel Deakin wrote:
>> >> As everyone will know, several Oracle-led JSRs (including JMS 2.1) have
>> >> made little progress this year due to the spec
>> >> leads being diverted partly or wholly to work on other things.
>> >>
>> >> At JavaOne last month Linda DeMichel, Java EE joint spec lead, gave an
>> >> update on progress and plans for Java EE 8.
>> >> You can watch the whole presentation online here:
>> >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Th9faGLhQoM
>> >> or you can simply review the slides here:
>> >> https://java.net/downloads/javaee-spec/JavaEE8Update.pdf
>> >>
>> >> Linda's presentation proposes a shift in focus for Java EE, to reflect
>> >> recent developments in the industry, which she
>> >> summarised as a "focus on deployment into the cloud", a "focus on
>> >> microservices", and an "emphasis on more rapid
>> >> evolution of applications".
>> >>
>> >> In order to address these changes, and modernise Java EE 8 for "cloud
>> >> and
>> >> microservices", she proposed a two-fold approach:
>> >>
>> >> * Adjust the plan for Java EE 8
>> >> * Create a plan for, and start work on, Java EE 9
>> >>
>> >> Java EE 8 and JMS 2.1
>> >> ---------------------
>> >>
>> >> Linda confirmed the plan to complete Java EE 8 in 2017 as originally
>> >> proposed, but with a number of changes to its
>> >> content. These are listed in slides 27 and 28 of her slide deck.
>> >>
>> >> The Java EE 8 JSR and most of its constituent JSRs would continue as
>> >> originally planned. She proposed that two new
>> >> constituent JSRs be added, for health checking and for configuration.
>> >>
>> >> And she proposed to drop three of the existing constituent JSRs: MVC
>> >> 1.0
>> >> (JSR 371), Management 2.0 (JSR 373) ... and JMS
>> >> 2.1 (JSR 368).
>> >>
>> >> The reason for dropping JMS 2.1 was that JMS was "no longer very
>> >> relevant
>> >> in cloud". JMS would continue to be part of
>> >> Java EE 8, but at its current version JMS 2.0 rather than at a new
>> >> version
>> >> JMS 2.1.
>> >>
>> >> Java EE 9
>> >> ---------
>> >>
>> >> Linda went on to propose a plan for Java EE 9, which would focus more
>> >> directly on the new requirements, with work
>> >> running in parallel with Java EE 8 and with a release date of 2019.
>> >> Please
>> >> see Linda's slides for more details, and if
>> >> you'd like to find out more about Java EE 9 I would recommend watching
>> >> a
>> >> couple of JavaOne presentations:
>> >>
>> >> Rajiv Mordani, Josh Dorr, Dhiraj Mutreja -- Enterprise Java for the
>> >> Cloud
>> >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t7miysQP7Dg
>> >> Josh Dorr, Joe Di Pol, Rajiv Mordani -- Portable Cloud Applications
>> >> with
>> >> Java EE
>> >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nCqVSf5v37s
>> >> There are two presentations because there was too much material to fit
>> >> into a single presentation. They include some
>> >> proposals for a new "eventing" JSR in Java EE 9 which I suspect will be
>> >> of
>> >> particular interest.
>> >>
>> >> Your views
>> >> ----------
>> >>
>> >> Your views on all of these proposals are invited.
>> >>
>> >> You can make comments on proposal to drop JMS 2.1 from Java EE 8 here
>> >> (users_at_jms-spec.java.net) or you can reach a wider
>> >> audience by sending them to the Java EE users mailing list
>> >> (users_at_javaee-spec.java.net). You can sign up to the latter
>> >> at https://java.net/projects/javaee-spec/lists
>> >>
>> >> Comments on the proposals for Java EE 9 (including the "eventing"
>> >> proposals) should be made to the Java EE users mailing
>> >> list.
>> >>
>> >> In addition, the Java EE spec leads have launched a new Java EE
>> >> community
>> >> survey. Please do take part and give your
>> >> views on the future of Java EE. This is at http://glassfish.org/survey
>> >> .
>> >> The survey closes on 21 Oct 2016. This will be
>> >> followed by a second survey that allows people to prioritise the top
>> >> items
>> >> from the first survey.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Nigel
>> >> (JMS 2.1 spec lead)
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Clebert Suconic
>
>
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Vaquar Khan
> +1 -224-436-0783
>
> IT Architect / Lead Consultant
> Greater Chicago
--
Clebert Suconic