I have been asked to prepare a draft JSR to propose a new version of the JMS specification: JMS 2.1, to form part of the
Java EE 8 platform as well as remaining a standalone API.
You can read the draft on the JMS spec wiki here:
https://java.net/projects/jms-spec/pages/JMS21JSRDraft1
I have also started a general page about JMS 2.1 here (aimed at the wider community):
https://java.net/projects/jms-spec/pages/JMS21
I plan to submit this within the next few weeks.
The main proposal is to continue the ease-of-use improvements started in JMS 2.1 with a complete overhaul of the API for
asynchronously consuming messages. For Java EE applications I'm proposing we define an easier-to-use and more general
alternative to JMS message-driven beans. Although I've got some ideas, nothing is fixed and the expert group will have
full scope to decide what is best. The intention, though, is one for which I believe there is general support: to
provide a simpler and more compact syntax than JMS MDBs, which will avoid the restrictions of both the JMS
MessageListener interface and the MDB lifecycle, and which make use of the features of CDI where possible.
I've also proposed a number of other features, based on our existing JIRA issue list at
https://java.net/projects/jms-spec/pages/JMS21Planning . Many of these were already raised or discussed for JMS 2.0 but
we didn't have time to include them.
This isn't intended to be a complete list, but a starting point for the work of the expert group. Several of the
features included in JMS 2.0 were not mentioned in the initial JSR but were added later in response to community
proposals, whilst some of the features proposed in the JMS 2.0 JSR never made it into the spec. I expect the same will
apply to JMS 2.1.
I'd welcome comments on the content of this draft JSR. It may not be able to accommodate more than minor comments before
submission of the JSR; the final content of the spec will of course be discussed and decided
as part of the normal Expert Group processes once the new JSR is underway.
In addition, please let me know if you wish to be listed in the JSR proposal as a supporter, particularly if you
represent a JMS vendor.
Thanks,
Nigel
P.S. Reminder: I'm sending this email to jsr343-experts_at_jms-spec.java.net, which will forward it to the wider JMS
community at users_at_jms-spec.java.net. Members of users_at_jms-spec.java.net are welcome to reply to this (and any other)
email; to avoid bouncing, make sure you send your reply to users_at_jms-spec.java.net.