[jboss-dev] AS5.x, AS6 roadmaps

[Brian Stansberry]

Dimitris Andreadis wrote:
> Regarding EAP5, my suggestion is to stick with Branch_5_0 and continue 
> work there. If at some point we *have* to consider non-backwards 
> compatible changes, then we can branch off Branch_5_1 from the latest 
> Branch_5_0. Or even stay with Branch_5_0 if the changes are not 
> significant.
> 
> What are the non-backward compatible changes anyway? That's the real 
> question to ask. If we are certain of those we could Branch_5_1 now. 

I think they'd likely focus on changes to the ProfileService. Work to 
improve things so that tools like Jopr that continue to advance over the 
life of an EAP have as solid a base to administer as possible. I don't 
know that such work will introduce non-backward compatible changes, but 
it wouldn't surprise me.

I also think we'll find a number of small things that weren't quite 
right in 5.0.0.GA where fixing them will introduce minor 
incompatibilities. E.g. https://jira.jboss.org/jira/browse/JBAS-6281 . 
Somehow I doubt that will be the only way. Perhaps a few tiny behavior 
differences like that don't justify calling something 5.1, but if they 
start to add up, IMHO they do.

> The 
> key is that we don't want to deviate much from 5.0.0.GA. Otherwise all 
> the testing and stabilization we have done is lost.
> 

+1. I think a next-release-in-3-months can only stand to have one 
significant area of development; the rest should all be just bug fixes 
and minor polishing. People not involved in that one area can shift to 
trunk or whatever we call it.

That said, I don't think we should use the release name as a way 
controlling the roadmap. Let's not call something that contains 
incompatible changes 5.0.1 just as a way to try to prevent further 
incompatible changes. Instead control the roadmap to an agreed upon 
scope, and then call it what it is.

> About trunk, I think we should point to AS6 Alpha. To try experimenting 
> with a different Bootstrap+ProfileService type of setup either create 
> another working branch or an external project (JBoss Reloaded or 
> whatever) and merge back when done.
> 
> I think the key is to keep trunk relatively usable and stable. If we 
> start breaking things here and there we'll repeat the same mistakes we 
> did with AS5; the whole thing will soon get out of control.
> 
> Carlo de Wolf wrote:
>> Tied to this is what we're going to do with the branches.
>>
>> We need a branch to get to EAP 5 which will contain fixes which are 
>> not backwards compatible with AS 5.0 GA, by definition this rules out 
>> Branch_5_0. For community purposes we should only have to use trunk, 
>> so effectively Branch_5_0 is a dead branch unless we need to do a 
>> 5.0.1. So we might as well startup the EAP branch right away.
>>
>> In AS trunk we can pursue the plan outlined below by Scott. Meanwhile 
>> I would say we create an AS 6 project in which we build 6 as we 
>> envisioned it in the first place: JBoss Bootstrap (MC, VDF etc) + 
>> JBoss Profile Service. For the first iteration we can hardcode one 
>> profile: JavaEE 6 until the Profile Service is up and running. That 
>> means any components coming free out of the AS 5 (/trunk) refactoring 
>> can immediately be incorporated into AS 6. At some point the 
>> refactoring of AS 5 will make it look almost exactly as AS 6 or AS 6 
>> will become fully operational. At which we deprecate AS 5 (/trunk).
>>
>> Carlo
>>
>> Scott Stark wrote:
>>> We need to finalize the 3 month road map for AS5.x and its relation 
>>> to AS6. The current discussions have been around embedded and EE6 
>>> type profiles and that we should focus on incorporating AS6 elements 
>>> in the next AS5.x release that improve the following areas:
>>>
>>> * Unit Test Capabilities.  The ability to embed JBoss inside unit 
>>> tests so that they can be run with no special plugins within an IDE, 
>>> vanilla maven testsuite, vanilla ant testsuite.
>>> * Maven JBoss Plugin.  You can define a configuration or override the 
>>> default.  Basically making it nice and easy to use for maven people.
>>> * Bundling of embedded jopr for the management console
>>> * Get on-demand working for as many services as possible
>>> * Optimize boot time (JBoss 5 boots much slower than JBoss 4.2)
>>> * Deprecate and prune components and move them to a deprecated folder 
>>> so that they don't boot up with default config. (Web Console, 
>>> JMX-Console, Scheduler, EJB 2.x)
>>> * Clean up service dependencies so its easier to add/remove 
>>> components and subsystems.  This is related to on-demand as well.
>>> * Define proper packaging of services so that dependencies and 
>>> isolation of implementation details exist.
>>> * Profile service supporting subprofiles and proper repository 
>>> abstraction to allow for simple requirements descriptions of services 
>>> in a profile driving the post MC bootstrap loading of services.
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> jboss-development mailing list
>>> jboss-development at lists.jboss.org
>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-development
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> jboss-development mailing list
>> jboss-development at lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-development
> _______________________________________________
> jboss-development mailing list
> jboss-development at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-development


-- 
Brian Stansberry
Lead, AS Clustering
JBoss, a division of Red Hat
brian.stansberry at redhat.com