On 30/09/2015 18:00, Nigel Deakin wrote:
> Following feedback and discussions I've now taken the proposals to improve JMS MDBs to the next stage, which is to draft
> a new chapter for the JMS specification. This is chapter 16 "JMS Message-driven beans".
>
> This can be downloaded from https://java.net/downloads/jms-spec/JMS%202.1/JMS21_EDR1_RC1_CH16.pdf
> I've updated the Javadocs to match; these are in the same place as before, https://jms-spec.java.net/2.1-SNAPSHOT/apidocs/
Any further comments on this?
Since this is quite a significant feature I'd like to propose we formally publish a draft of the specification that
includes this new chapter and designate it as "Early Draft 1". With JavaOne coming up in a few weeks I'm expecting a lot
of interest in JMS 2.1 (and Java EE generally) and I'd like to be able to invite people to read this and make comments.
For those unfamiliar with the JCP process, the purpose of an early draft is to seek feedback from the public. It is
"designed to encourage Expert Groups to feel comfortable going into this review with open issues and questions that they
would like the public to help them resolve". In this case we do have a number of open issues such as exception handling,
which are mentioned explicitly in the current draft.
Note that there is no limit to the number of early drafts we can publish, which is why I'm calling this EDR 1.
Here's the complete spec including the new chapter:
https://java.net/projects/jms-spec/downloads/download/JMS%202.1/JMS21_EDR1_RC1.pdf
(The new chapter is unchanged from before, but this allows you to see it in the context of the whole spec)
After this review we will need to resolve the issues listed, and then we can move on to some of the other features we
want to see in JMS 2.1.
If you have any comments on this, please let me know.
Nigel
>
> At a future stage we also need to consider
> * Extending this to allow batch delivery (as proposed by Clebert)
> * Defining redelivery behaviour if the MDB throws an exception (as proposed in the original JSR): redelivery limits,
> dead message queues etc.
>
> Please take a look and let me know what you think.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Nigel
>