| You're a committer according to the project proposal at least.  Either way, I'd say definitely don't step aside. 
 IMO, if the line between committer and contributor was blurry to invisible, that'd be pretty fantastic.  Anyone willing to do work should be enabled to the best of our ability. 
 
  
    
  
  
    Can I begin putting the road map
      together without actually being a committer right away? When the
      commiters step up, I will step aside. 
 Reza RahmanPrincipal Program Manager
 Java on Azure
 
 Please note views expressed here are my own as an individual
      community member and do not reflect the views of my employer.
 
 
 On 9/23/2019 7:31 PM, Ed Bratt wrote:
 
      Initial contributors were included in the original project
        proposals, which you can find here
        (search for the JMS
          proposal). Since then, changes to committer list have been
        handled through the committer election process.  Wayne wrote a
        blog page here,
        which describes this process. Current JMS committer list is here. It would be fabulous if someone could start putting a road-map
        for JMS together. I don't know why we'd need to wait on putting
        together the thoughts on this.
 -- Ed
 On 9/23/2019 2:48 PM, Reza Rahman
        wrote:
 Does
        anyone know what the time frame for starting this work is? Who
        become the first committers? 
 Reza Rahman
 Principal Program Manager
 Java on Azure
 
 Please note views expressed here are my own as an individual
        community member and do not reflect the views of my employer.
 
 On 9/15/2019 11:27 AM, Snackbox wrote:
 
 Alexey! 
 
 On 2019-09-15, at 16:45, Alexey <onodera@xxxxxxx>
            wrote: Maybe the queue name should go into the config? It’s more
          something about the environment than the application itself.
          In the MessageApi, I used the name of the interface as a
          default, e.g. `org.example.NotificationsClient`.
 Hello
 
 I agree that the ideas are great and would make a lot of
            existing boilerplate redundant. There’s just one piece of
            the puzzle that’s missing: how do you link the new listener
            to a JMS connection?
 
 If you take a look at
            https://github.com/tomitribe/jms-proposals/blob/master/all-together/src/test/java/org/example/BuildAndNotify.java,
            it’s just a @MessageConsumer, so there must be a place in
            the code that creates the correct connection factory and
            attaches the consumer to the correct connection. This is
            something that shouldn’t be an implementation detail of a
            Jakarta EE application server, as I hope to see Jakarta
            Messaging 100% usable in lightweight applications.
 
 
 
 Another piece of the same code that I
            linked to above that bothers me is the creation of the new
            strongly-typed client. First of all, it should probably be
            injected into the class instead of the connection factory. I strongly agree!
 
 
 And secondly, a lot of JMS code
            replies to the queue specified in the ReplyTo header, so a
            non-void listener method could be annotated to indicate the
            way its return value should be converted to the message to
            be sent to that queue. I like your idea! So only if an application needs more than
          one reply, e.g. when sending a build-start and a build-success
          event, the code would have to care about the response queue.
 
 
 Rü
 
 
 From: ghzooooon@xxxxxxxxx
            _______________________________________________Sent: Sunday, September 15, 2019 01:10
 To: jms developer discussions
 Subject: Re: [jms-dev] Thoughts on JMS 3.0
 
 Hi everyone,
 
 I really love the ideas on David's presentation, also great
            work Rüdiger.
 
 Hi all,
 
 I just watched the presentation David gave on Jakarta
            Messaging 3.0 in the JakartaOne livestream, and I loved it.
            This is really what JMS needs and it probably just takes the
            right time for a revolution like this to become a reality.
 
 Back in 2010 I was coding a lot of JMS senders and
            receivers, so I turned my pain with writing all that boiler
            plate code into what I termed MessageApi (https://github.com/t1/message-api),
            which was based roughly on the same ideas as JMS 3.0. I even
            joined the JMS EG to help promote it into a standard, but it
            was obviously way too early. It’s wonderful to see something
            similar to happen now; it seems that some ideas are just
            destined to become reality!
 
 I haven’t worked with JMS for the last 5 years or so, so
            there was no progress from my side any more. Maybe you’ll
            find my old input worth taking a look at.
 
 
 Kind regards,
 Rüdiger
 
 _______________________________________________
 jms-dev mailing list
 jms-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
 To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or
            unsubscribe from this list, visit
 https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jms-dev
 
 _______________________________________________
 jms-dev mailing list
 jms-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
 To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or
            unsubscribe from this list, visit
 https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jms-dev
 
 jms-dev mailing list
 jms-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
 To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or
          unsubscribe from this list, visit
 https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jms-dev
 
 
 
 
 -- 
Reza Rahman
Principal Program Manager
Java on Azure
Please note that views here are my own as an individual community member and do not represent the views of my employer. 
_______________________________________________ jms-dev mailing listjms-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jms-dev
 |