Howard/Clebert,
The latest roadmap discussions can be seen here:
http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/jboss-development/2008-December/013263.html
Commits should also be done in the 5.0 Branch too:
https://svn.jboss.org/repos/jbossas/branches/Branch_5_0/
Shelly
On Wed, 2009-01-07 at 10:53 +0800, Howard Gao wrote:
> I only know this one. :) I need to make sure it is the right place to go.
>
>
>
> Clebert Suconic wrote:
>
>> Are there any other branches we have to update?
>>
>>
>>
>> Howard Gao wrote:
>>
>>> Hi JBoss team,
>>>
>>> I'm working to add JBoss Messaging 1.4 examples to AS 5 SVN repo. The
>>> location I put those examples is
>>>
>>> messaging/src/etc/examples
>>>
>>> and the examples will be built into AS 5 installation package, the
>>> location will be :
>>>
>>> $JBOSS_HOME/docs/examples/jms/examples
>>>
>>> I'm asking two questions,
>>>
>>> 1. are those above locations OK ?
>>> 2. I'm working on the AS 5 trunk
>>> (
https://svn.jboss.org/repos/jbossas/trunk), is that also OK that
>>> those changes go to the trunk?
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>> Howard
>>>
>>>
> _______________________________________________
> jboss-development mailing list
> jboss-development(a)lists.jboss.org
>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-development
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Subject:
> Re: [jboss-dev] AS5.x, AS6 roadmaps
> From:
> Dimitris Andreadis <dandread(a)redhat.com>
> Date:
> Mon, 22 Dec 2008 20:16:52 +0200
> To:
> "JBoss.org development list" <jboss-development(a)lists.jboss.org>
>
> To:
> "JBoss.org development list" <jboss-development(a)lists.jboss.org>
>
>
> 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.
> 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.
>
> 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(a)lists.jboss.org
>>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-development
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> jboss-development mailing list
>> jboss-development(a)lists.jboss.org
>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-development
> _______________________________________________
> jboss-development mailing list
> jboss-development(a)lists.jboss.org
>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-development
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> jboss-development mailing list
> jboss-development(a)lists.jboss.org
>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-development
>