|[jakarta.ee-community] Help Move Forward Jakarta Messaging|
Please consider lending a helping hand, especially with the very simple issues that should make an easy first contribution to Jakarta EE: https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/messaging/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3A%22good+first+issue%22.
Here is the triage spreadsheet again for reference: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1q7XfC-zNend0aT8PKbcOTbKx_9tXPrhmolBI9iPr4BE/edit?usp=sharing.
I followed up and updated some issues according to Reza's spreadsheet:
- Marked the issues in "Good first issue" section with the "Good first issue" label
- Added issues in "Worth looking at first" into the 3.1 milestone
- Marked issues in the CDI section with a new CDI Integration label
- Marked issues in the Java SE section with a new Java SE Integration label
- Marked issues in the Modernizing section and Important but premature section with the 4.0 label, which is currently a placeholder for all big JMS.next issuesWhen I find some more time, I'd like to review the issues in "Very low priority (just close or mark as such)" and see if we should close them, resolve them or mark them as low priority or something like "currently out of scope" label. I'd like some help with that. If anybody finds some time, please go through those issues and comment with your opinion or information.
ne 30. 5. 2021 o 7:44 Reza Rahman <reza_rahman@xxxxxxxxx> napísal(a):
As I had suggested, I took a stab at triaging the old issues that have
been there for some time now. Here are the results:
From my perspective here is a summary:
* There are a very small number of issues I think makes sense to look at
for the next release (they are under the label "Worth looking at first").
* There are a very small number of issues folks that end users could
easily pick up (they are under the label "Good first issue").
* The big ticket issues really worth working on are CDI Message
Listeners, a Java SE bootstrap API, AMQP interoperability and Kafka
interoperability/modernizing Messaging. Similarly there are very forward
looking things that are a bit too premature like Reactive Messaging.
* There are a ton of issues I think could be looked at further if there
is time (they are under the label "Should be evaluated further"). I did
order these somewhat, with more end-user focused features first. The
rest I think are mostly issues that vendors would really care about.
These perhaps made sense at a point where there was more time, resources
and investment around this particular specification. I don't think that
is the case for a majority of Messaging vendors any more.
* There are a ton of issues I think should just be closed or assigned
very low priority. They perhaps made sense at a point where there was
more time, resources and investment around this particular
specification. I don't think that is the case for a majority of
Messaging vendors any more.
I do encourage other folks to give this a try - especially the end users
with a genuine real world interest in the specification.
Hope this helps.
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.
Back to the top