Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!
My hi fives!!! 1) Java 5.0 and JEE 5.0 support 2) Fully functional Console (Automate all tasks including creation of deployment plans) I have used SUN JAS web console and like it! Focus on ease of use cause that is what general people need. I need my application running. I don't want to worry about the 1001 catches and work around or procedures. 3) More and more documentations and easily available at one single place 4) Improved IDE integration, not only with Eclipse, but also include support for Netbeans, IntelliJ, etc. . . 5) Integrate or provide as addons, things like Struts Frameworks, JSF, Pluto, etc.-- Dream like you're never gonna die, Like like you're gonna die today!
Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!
I've updated the wiki with all the feedback (including the latest from Toby and Rohit).. http://opensource.atlassian.com/confluence/oss/display/GERONIMO/Geronimo+User+Requirements Dave Colasurdo wrote: I tried to order them by priority (based on number of times mentioned) within each category/sub-category.. The ones that were mentioned the most are first on the list and so forth.. Items that were mentioned only once are listed in random order.. Anyway, I've updated the list below with the number of requests for each item. I've denoted with *(number)*. Absence of a number indicates one request for an item. Of course the community needs to digest the input and decide on priorities. BTW, I have added Global JNDI ENC to the list.. If folks agree with the format, I will post to the wiki.. -Dave- Matt Hogstrom wrote: This is great Dave...I think we need to prioritze them as well. Can you translate the priorty from the other e-mails to this? Matt Dave Colasurdo wrote: Excellent feedback from all.. Here is an attempt to consolidate the feedback into one list. (Hope I'm not stepping on anyone's toes.) I've grouped by a few high level categories.. Of course, one could argue that some of the items could fall into multiple categories... Any glaring omissions? Specifications/Functionality -JDK 5 for Geronimo *(11)* -JEE 5 *(3)* Enterprise JavaBeans 3.0 *(5)* Java Servlet 2.5 Java ServerPages 2.1 Java ServerPages Standard Tag Library Java Persistence Architecture (is this part of Java EE?) Java Transaction API (JTA) J2EE Management J2EE Connector Architecture -JAX-WS support *(4)* -GBean improvements (doc, lifecycle, dependencies, dep. injection, ..) *(2)* -Dynamic Queries *(2)* -javax.persistence -annotated session beans. -Support for JSR-168 (Portlet API) -ServiceMix -Maven2 support -service/daemon wrapper -Remove the requirement of the openejb-jar.xml?? -Better db tools in the admin console -Configuration management, possibility to make a production version without some current modules (e.g. OpenEJB or ActiveMQ), there are end users who don't have the resources (memory, disk) to run Geronimo fully equipped and they don't need every feature of the J2EE stack - Continued support of Jetty -First class HttpSession clustering. -More integration with Apache mod_JK/mod_ajp . It would be nice if a request would continue through a pool until it landed on a server with that webapp. -Mass deployment tools that allow the server 'cloning' and rollout mentioned during Geronimos initial days. -Global JNDI ENC Tools * -NetBeans support *(3)* -JDK 5 for launching and running the Geronimo Eclipse plugin *(2)* -Eclipse plugin improvement (it is really good but think it could be better) -Eclipse mini-roadmap (from Sachin) - run resources directly from the workspace, so the ear isn't built and re-packaged on every publish - More control over the runtime/server wizards, publish process, and server management - Continue to build up the UI so we have a complete set of form editors for the G deployment plans - ability to see changes reflected live in something like the Common Navigator as you modify your plans - full synchronization between the source view and views using the model - copy/paste, undo/redo support -There's also plans in WTP to improve the Server Tools Framework to make it easier to have more control over what defines your runtime. Usability * -Deployment *(5)* Less deployment requirements (simpler plans, more defaults, etc.) Simplifying deployment (some means to generate geronimo deployment plans? Easier way to deploy EAR Files More application validation at deployment Better redeployment to prevent requests from failing if they hit that server during the redeploy. -More powerful text configuration -Migration path from Tomcat to Geronimo -Shortcuts for building web services Process *** -More frequent releases incorporating more user feedback (small releases more often vs. big releases only 4 times a year) *(7)* -Geronimo Certified Partner Program (including Jetspeed-2 as a member). *(2)* Documentation *(10)* * -Tutorials *(4)* How to use Geronimo with: Apache Axis, WSS4J, ActiveMQ -Cookbooks -Better documentation on deployment descriptors -More detailed documentation about the architecture and Gbeans *(2)* -A browsable table describing where to find all plans, etc. for each deployed component or service. -More documentaion on deploying EAR's, WAR's, EJB's, RAR's, classloading and dependencies with that apps) Examples *(4)* -Examples for everything -More documentation/examples for me should be more explicative models of the basic openejb-jar.xml and ejb-jar.xml, explaining which tag points where or what Session beans, entity beans(BMP and CMP) Message-Driven-Bean. -Dave-
Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!
Sachin Patel wrote: Yes we should have both but I'm not sure if I agree with your second statement. :) I think JIRA should be the first place users should go to request a feature. The wiki will never encapsulate all the work that needs to be done for a project. JIRA tells us this. Thus the wiki should be used to bundle the wish-list and associate them to the themes and priorities for a release. I think trying to keep jiras and the wiki synchronized is invaluable and is unnecessary work. The wiki should be the place where to look for what is planned for that release, and the discussions around and links to jiras/threads for those items. So the first step I think should be to open jira's and from there these can be sorted and prioritized and pushed up into the wiki, I don't think it should be the other way around. There is alot of things that need to be cleaned up in current in JIRA and by using it as the first place for work items this forces us to maintain and constantly scub JIRA to provide an accurate indication of project status. thats by 2 cents :) +1 - I always look in the JIRA records for a project (to get a picture of its stability and priorities) before adopting it. JIRA is a great tool for prioritising and keeping track of work, lets not duplicate this in the Wiki. John - sachin On Apr 5, 2006, at 6:12 PM, Matt Hogstrom wrote: I think you need both. The Wiki is a place to look at what there is to do...JIRA is the way to tell people your doing it. Dave Colasurdo wrote: Wasn't suggesting the wiki as the final resting spot, just a temporary holding spot while the user requirements were being gathered, tallied, discussed and prioritized by the community. It works better than email threads passing in the night. No objection to moving the output to JIRAs.. -Dave- Sachin Patel wrote: I don't think they should go on the wiki. Why can't we add them as Wish List Jira's with #votes and have the wish list query exported and posted? This way further discussion and progress on each of the items could be tracked as well. - sachin On Apr 5, 2006, at 4:07 PM, Dave Colasurdo wrote: I tried to order them by priority (based on number of times mentioned) within each category/sub-category.. The ones that were mentioned the most are first on the list and so forth.. Items that were mentioned only once are listed in random order.. Anyway, I've updated the list below with the number of requests for each item. I've denoted with *(number)*. Absence of a number indicates one request for an item. Of course the community needs to digest the input and decide on priorities. BTW, I have added Global JNDI ENC to the list.. If folks agree with the format, I will post to the wiki.. -Dave- Matt Hogstrom wrote: This is great Dave...I think we need to prioritze them as well. Can you translate the priorty from the other e-mails to this? Matt Dave Colasurdo wrote: Excellent feedback from all.. Here is an attempt to consolidate the feedback into one list. (Hope I'm not stepping on anyone's toes.) I've grouped by a few high level categories.. Of course, one could argue that some of the items could fall into multiple categories... Any glaring omissions? Specifications/Functionality -JDK 5 for Geronimo *(11)* -JEE 5 *(3)* Enterprise JavaBeans 3.0 *(5)* Java Servlet 2.5 Java ServerPages 2.1 Java ServerPages Standard Tag Library Java Persistence Architecture (is this part of Java EE?) Java Transaction API (JTA) J2EE Management J2EE Connector Architecture -JAX-WS support *(4)* -GBean improvements (doc, lifecycle, dependencies, dep. injection, ..) *(2)* -Dynamic Queries *(2)* -javax.persistence -annotated session beans. -Support for JSR-168 (Portlet API) -ServiceMix -Maven2 support -service/daemon wrapper -Remove the requirement of the openejb-jar.xml?? -Better db tools in the admin console -Configuration management, possibility to make a production version without some current modules (e.g. OpenEJB or ActiveMQ), there are end users who don't have the resources (memory, disk) to run Geronimo fully equipped and they don't need every feature of the J2EE stack - Continued support of Jetty -First class HttpSession clustering. -More integration with Apache mod_JK/mod_ajp . It would be nice if a request would continue through a pool until it landed on a server with that webapp. -Mass deployment tools that allow the server 'cloning' and rollout mentioned during Geronimos initial days. -Global JNDI ENC Tools * -NetBeans support *(3)* -JDK 5 for launching and running the Geronimo Eclipse plugin *(2)* -Eclipse plugin improvement (it is really good but think it could be better) -Eclipse mini-roadmap (from Sachin) - run resources directly from the workspace, so the ear isn't built and re-packaged on every publish - More control over the runtime/server wizards, publish process, and server
Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!
Hi, Is there any specific reason whythere is no Global JNDI ENC in Geronimo? I remember in the old days pre-M5 there used to be jndi-name tags in the resource deployment plans. Why was this feature removed if it was there? It would be helpful to have a Global JNDI ENC. Regards Manu
Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!
This is great Dave...I think we need to prioritze them as well. Can you translate the priorty from the other e-mails to this? Matt Dave Colasurdo wrote: Excellent feedback from all.. Here is an attempt to consolidate the feedback into one list. (Hope I'm not stepping on anyone's toes.) I've grouped by a few high level categories.. Of course, one could argue that some of the items could fall into multiple categories... Any glaring omissions? Specifications/Functionality -JDK 5 for Geronimo -JEE 5 Enterprise JavaBeans 3.0 Java Servlet 2.5 Java ServerPages 2.1 Java ServerPages Standard Tag Library Java Persistence Architecture (is this part of Java EE?) Java Transaction API (JTA) J2EE Management J2EE Connector Architecture -JAX-WS support -javax.persistence -Dynamic Queries -annotated session beans. -Support for JSR-168 (Portlet API) -ServiceMix -GBean improvements (doc, lifecycle, dependencies, dep. injection, ..) -Maven2 support -service/daemon wrapper -Remove the requirement of the openejb-jar.xml?? -Better db tools in the admin console -Configuration management, possibility to make a production version without some current modules (e.g. OpenEJB or ActiveMQ), there are end users who don't have the resources (memory, disk) to run Geronimo fully equipped and they don't need every feature of the J2EE stack - Continued support of Jetty -First class HttpSession clustering. -More integration with Apache mod_JK/mod_ajp . It would be nice if a request would continue through a pool until it landed on a server with that webapp. -Mass deployment tools that allow the server 'cloning' and rollout mentioned during Geronimos initial days. Tools * -JDK 5 for launching and running the Geronimo Eclipse plugin -Eclipse plugin improvement (it is really good but think it could be better) -Eclipse mini-roadmap (from Sachin) - run resources directly from the workspace, so the ear isn't built and re-packaged on every publish - More control over the runtime/server wizards, publish process, and server management - Continue to build up the UI so we have a complete set of form editors for the G deployment plans - ability to see changes reflected live in something like the Common Navigator as you modify your plans - full synchronization between the source view and views using the model - copy/paste, undo/redo support -There's also plans in WTP to improve the Server Tools Framework to make it easier to have more control over what defines your runtime. -NetBeans support Usability * -Deployment Less deployment requirements (simpler plans, more defaults, etc.) Simplifying deployment (some means to generate geronimo deployment plans? Easier way to deploy EAR Files More application validation at deployment Better redeployment to prevent requests from failing if they hit that server during the redeploy. -More powerful text configuration -Migration path from Tomcat to Geronimo -Shortcuts for building web services Process *** -More frequent releases incorporating more user feedback (small releases more often vs. big releases only 4 times a year) -Geronimo Certified Partner Program (including Jetspeed-2 as a member). Documentation * -Tutorials How to use Geronimo with: Apache Axis, WSS4J, ActiveMQ -Cookbooks -Better documentation on deployment descriptors -More detailed documentation about the architecture. -A browsable table describing where to find all plans, etc. for each deployed component or service. -More documentaion on deploying EAR's, WAR's, EJB's, RAR's, classloading and dependencies with that apps) Examples -Examples for everything -More documentation/examples for me should be more explicative models of the basic openejb-jar.xml and ejb-jar.xml, explaining which tag points where or what Session beans, entity beans(BMP and CMP) Message-Driven-Bean. -Dave-
Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!
I tried to order them by priority (based on number of times mentioned) within each category/sub-category.. The ones that were mentioned the most are first on the list and so forth.. Items that were mentioned only once are listed in random order.. Anyway, I've updated the list below with the number of requests for each item. I've denoted with *(number)*. Absence of a number indicates one request for an item. Of course the community needs to digest the input and decide on priorities. BTW, I have added Global JNDI ENC to the list.. If folks agree with the format, I will post to the wiki.. -Dave- Matt Hogstrom wrote: This is great Dave...I think we need to prioritze them as well. Can you translate the priorty from the other e-mails to this? Matt Dave Colasurdo wrote: Excellent feedback from all.. Here is an attempt to consolidate the feedback into one list. (Hope I'm not stepping on anyone's toes.) I've grouped by a few high level categories.. Of course, one could argue that some of the items could fall into multiple categories... Any glaring omissions? Specifications/Functionality -JDK 5 for Geronimo *(11)* -JEE 5 *(3)* Enterprise JavaBeans 3.0 *(5)* Java Servlet 2.5 Java ServerPages 2.1 Java ServerPages Standard Tag Library Java Persistence Architecture (is this part of Java EE?) Java Transaction API (JTA) J2EE Management J2EE Connector Architecture -JAX-WS support *(4)* -GBean improvements (doc, lifecycle, dependencies, dep. injection, ..) *(2)* -Dynamic Queries *(2)* -javax.persistence -annotated session beans. -Support for JSR-168 (Portlet API) -ServiceMix -Maven2 support -service/daemon wrapper -Remove the requirement of the openejb-jar.xml?? -Better db tools in the admin console -Configuration management, possibility to make a production version without some current modules (e.g. OpenEJB or ActiveMQ), there are end users who don't have the resources (memory, disk) to run Geronimo fully equipped and they don't need every feature of the J2EE stack - Continued support of Jetty -First class HttpSession clustering. -More integration with Apache mod_JK/mod_ajp . It would be nice if a request would continue through a pool until it landed on a server with that webapp. -Mass deployment tools that allow the server 'cloning' and rollout mentioned during Geronimos initial days. -Global JNDI ENC Tools * -NetBeans support *(3)* -JDK 5 for launching and running the Geronimo Eclipse plugin *(2)* -Eclipse plugin improvement (it is really good but think it could be better) -Eclipse mini-roadmap (from Sachin) - run resources directly from the workspace, so the ear isn't built and re-packaged on every publish - More control over the runtime/server wizards, publish process, and server management - Continue to build up the UI so we have a complete set of form editors for the G deployment plans - ability to see changes reflected live in something like the Common Navigator as you modify your plans - full synchronization between the source view and views using the model - copy/paste, undo/redo support -There's also plans in WTP to improve the Server Tools Framework to make it easier to have more control over what defines your runtime. Usability * -Deployment *(5)* Less deployment requirements (simpler plans, more defaults, etc.) Simplifying deployment (some means to generate geronimo deployment plans? Easier way to deploy EAR Files More application validation at deployment Better redeployment to prevent requests from failing if they hit that server during the redeploy. -More powerful text configuration -Migration path from Tomcat to Geronimo -Shortcuts for building web services Process *** -More frequent releases incorporating more user feedback (small releases more often vs. big releases only 4 times a year) *(7)* -Geronimo Certified Partner Program (including Jetspeed-2 as a member). *(2)* Documentation *(10)* * -Tutorials *(4)* How to use Geronimo with: Apache Axis, WSS4J, ActiveMQ -Cookbooks -Better documentation on deployment descriptors -More detailed documentation about the architecture and Gbeans *(2)* -A browsable table describing where to find all plans, etc. for each deployed component or service. -More documentaion on deploying EAR's, WAR's, EJB's, RAR's, classloading and dependencies with that apps) Examples *(4)* -Examples for everything -More documentation/examples for me should be more explicative models of the basic openejb-jar.xml and ejb-jar.xml, explaining which tag points where or what Session beans, entity beans(BMP and CMP) Message-Driven-Bean. -Dave-
Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!
I don't think they should go on the wiki. Why can't we add them as Wish List Jira's with #votes and have the wish list query exported and posted? This way further discussion and progress on each of the items could be tracked as well. - sachin On Apr 5, 2006, at 4:07 PM, Dave Colasurdo wrote: I tried to order them by priority (based on number of times mentioned) within each category/sub-category.. The ones that were mentioned the most are first on the list and so forth.. Items that were mentioned only once are listed in random order.. Anyway, I've updated the list below with the number of requests for each item. I've denoted with *(number)*. Absence of a number indicates one request for an item. Of course the community needs to digest the input and decide on priorities. BTW, I have added Global JNDI ENC to the list.. If folks agree with the format, I will post to the wiki.. -Dave- Matt Hogstrom wrote: This is great Dave...I think we need to prioritze them as well. Can you translate the priorty from the other e-mails to this? Matt Dave Colasurdo wrote: Excellent feedback from all.. Here is an attempt to consolidate the feedback into one list. (Hope I'm not stepping on anyone's toes.) I've grouped by a few high level categories.. Of course, one could argue that some of the items could fall into multiple categories... Any glaring omissions? Specifications/Functionality -JDK 5 for Geronimo *(11)* -JEE 5 *(3)* Enterprise JavaBeans 3.0 *(5)* Java Servlet 2.5 Java ServerPages 2.1 Java ServerPages Standard Tag Library Java Persistence Architecture (is this part of Java EE?) Java Transaction API (JTA) J2EE Management J2EE Connector Architecture -JAX-WS support *(4)* -GBean improvements (doc, lifecycle, dependencies, dep. injection, ..) *(2)* -Dynamic Queries *(2)* -javax.persistence -annotated session beans. -Support for JSR-168 (Portlet API) -ServiceMix -Maven2 support -service/daemon wrapper -Remove the requirement of the openejb-jar.xml?? -Better db tools in the admin console -Configuration management, possibility to make a production version without some current modules (e.g. OpenEJB or ActiveMQ), there are end users who don't have the resources (memory, disk) to run Geronimo fully equipped and they don't need every feature of the J2EE stack - Continued support of Jetty -First class HttpSession clustering. -More integration with Apache mod_JK/mod_ajp . It would be nice if a request would continue through a pool until it landed on a server with that webapp. -Mass deployment tools that allow the server 'cloning' and rollout mentioned during Geronimos initial days. -Global JNDI ENC Tools * -NetBeans support *(3)* -JDK 5 for launching and running the Geronimo Eclipse plugin *(2)* -Eclipse plugin improvement (it is really good but think it could be better) -Eclipse mini-roadmap (from Sachin) - run resources directly from the workspace, so the ear isn't built and re-packaged on every publish - More control over the runtime/server wizards, publish process, and server management - Continue to build up the UI so we have a complete set of form editors for the G deployment plans - ability to see changes reflected live in something like the Common Navigator as you modify your plans - full synchronization between the source view and views using the model - copy/paste, undo/redo support -There's also plans in WTP to improve the Server Tools Framework to make it easier to have more control over what defines your runtime. Usability * -Deployment *(5)* Less deployment requirements (simpler plans, more defaults, etc.) Simplifying deployment (some means to generate geronimo deployment plans? Easier way to deploy EAR Files More application validation at deployment Better redeployment to prevent requests from failing if they hit that server during the redeploy. -More powerful text configuration -Migration path from Tomcat to Geronimo -Shortcuts for building web services Process *** -More frequent releases incorporating more user feedback (small releases more often vs. big releases only 4 times a year) *(7)* -Geronimo Certified Partner Program (including Jetspeed-2 as a member). *(2)* Documentation *(10)* * -Tutorials *(4)* How to use Geronimo with: Apache Axis, WSS4J, ActiveMQ -Cookbooks -Better documentation on deployment descriptors -More detailed documentation about the architecture and Gbeans *(2)* -A browsable table describing where to find all plans, etc. for each deployed component or service. -More documentaion on deploying EAR's, WAR's, EJB's, RAR's, classloading and dependencies with that apps) Examples *(4)* -Examples for everything -More documentation/examples for me should be more explicative models of the basic openejb-jar.xml and ejb-jar.xml, explaining which tag points where or what
Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!
Wasn't suggesting the wiki as the final resting spot, just a temporary holding spot while the user requirements were being gathered, tallied, discussed and prioritized by the community. It works better than email threads passing in the night. No objection to moving the output to JIRAs.. -Dave- Sachin Patel wrote: I don't think they should go on the wiki. Why can't we add them as Wish List Jira's with #votes and have the wish list query exported and posted? This way further discussion and progress on each of the items could be tracked as well. - sachin On Apr 5, 2006, at 4:07 PM, Dave Colasurdo wrote: I tried to order them by priority (based on number of times mentioned) within each category/sub-category.. The ones that were mentioned the most are first on the list and so forth.. Items that were mentioned only once are listed in random order.. Anyway, I've updated the list below with the number of requests for each item. I've denoted with *(number)*. Absence of a number indicates one request for an item. Of course the community needs to digest the input and decide on priorities. BTW, I have added Global JNDI ENC to the list.. If folks agree with the format, I will post to the wiki.. -Dave- Matt Hogstrom wrote: This is great Dave...I think we need to prioritze them as well. Can you translate the priorty from the other e-mails to this? Matt Dave Colasurdo wrote: Excellent feedback from all.. Here is an attempt to consolidate the feedback into one list. (Hope I'm not stepping on anyone's toes.) I've grouped by a few high level categories.. Of course, one could argue that some of the items could fall into multiple categories... Any glaring omissions? Specifications/Functionality -JDK 5 for Geronimo *(11)* -JEE 5 *(3)* Enterprise JavaBeans 3.0 *(5)* Java Servlet 2.5 Java ServerPages 2.1 Java ServerPages Standard Tag Library Java Persistence Architecture (is this part of Java EE?) Java Transaction API (JTA) J2EE Management J2EE Connector Architecture -JAX-WS support *(4)* -GBean improvements (doc, lifecycle, dependencies, dep. injection, ..) *(2)* -Dynamic Queries *(2)* -javax.persistence -annotated session beans. -Support for JSR-168 (Portlet API) -ServiceMix -Maven2 support -service/daemon wrapper -Remove the requirement of the openejb-jar.xml?? -Better db tools in the admin console -Configuration management, possibility to make a production version without some current modules (e.g. OpenEJB or ActiveMQ), there are end users who don't have the resources (memory, disk) to run Geronimo fully equipped and they don't need every feature of the J2EE stack - Continued support of Jetty -First class HttpSession clustering. -More integration with Apache mod_JK/mod_ajp . It would be nice if a request would continue through a pool until it landed on a server with that webapp. -Mass deployment tools that allow the server 'cloning' and rollout mentioned during Geronimos initial days. -Global JNDI ENC Tools * -NetBeans support *(3)* -JDK 5 for launching and running the Geronimo Eclipse plugin *(2)* -Eclipse plugin improvement (it is really good but think it could be better) -Eclipse mini-roadmap (from Sachin) - run resources directly from the workspace, so the ear isn't built and re-packaged on every publish - More control over the runtime/server wizards, publish process, and server management - Continue to build up the UI so we have a complete set of form editors for the G deployment plans - ability to see changes reflected live in something like the Common Navigator as you modify your plans - full synchronization between the source view and views using the model - copy/paste, undo/redo support -There's also plans in WTP to improve the Server Tools Framework to make it easier to have more control over what defines your runtime. Usability * -Deployment *(5)* Less deployment requirements (simpler plans, more defaults, etc.) Simplifying deployment (some means to generate geronimo deployment plans? Easier way to deploy EAR Files More application validation at deployment Better redeployment to prevent requests from failing if they hit that server during the redeploy. -More powerful text configuration -Migration path from Tomcat to Geronimo -Shortcuts for building web services Process *** -More frequent releases incorporating more user feedback (small releases more often vs. big releases only 4 times a year) *(7)* -Geronimo Certified Partner Program (including Jetspeed-2 as a member). *(2)* Documentation *(10)* * -Tutorials *(4)* How to use Geronimo with: Apache Axis, WSS4J, ActiveMQ -Cookbooks -Better documentation on deployment descriptors -More detailed documentation about the architecture and Gbeans *(2)* -A browsable table describing where to find all plans, etc. for each deployed component or service. -More documentaion on
Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!
Yes we should have both but I'm not sure if I agree with your second statement. :) I think JIRA should be the first place users should go to request a feature. The wiki will never encapsulate all the work that needs to be done for a project. JIRA tells us this. Thus the wiki should be used to bundle the wish-list and associate them to the themes and priorities for a release. I think trying to keep jiras and the wiki synchronized is invaluable and is unnecessary work. The wiki should be the place where to look for what is planned for that release, and the discussions around and links to jiras/threads for those items. So the first step I think should be to open jira's and from there these can be sorted and prioritized and pushed up into the wiki, I don't think it should be the other way around. There is alot of things that need to be cleaned up in current in JIRA and by using it as the first place for work items this forces us to maintain and constantly scub JIRA to provide an accurate indication of project status. thats by 2 cents :) - sachin On Apr 5, 2006, at 6:12 PM, Matt Hogstrom wrote: I think you need both. The Wiki is a place to look at what there is to do...JIRA is the way to tell people your doing it. Dave Colasurdo wrote: Wasn't suggesting the wiki as the final resting spot, just a temporary holding spot while the user requirements were being gathered, tallied, discussed and prioritized by the community. It works better than email threads passing in the night. No objection to moving the output to JIRAs.. -Dave- Sachin Patel wrote: I don't think they should go on the wiki. Why can't we add them as Wish List Jira's with #votes and have the wish list query exported and posted? This way further discussion and progress on each of the items could be tracked as well. - sachin On Apr 5, 2006, at 4:07 PM, Dave Colasurdo wrote: I tried to order them by priority (based on number of times mentioned) within each category/sub-category.. The ones that were mentioned the most are first on the list and so forth.. Items that were mentioned only once are listed in random order.. Anyway, I've updated the list below with the number of requests for each item. I've denoted with *(number)*. Absence of a number indicates one request for an item. Of course the community needs to digest the input and decide on priorities. BTW, I have added Global JNDI ENC to the list.. If folks agree with the format, I will post to the wiki.. -Dave- Matt Hogstrom wrote: This is great Dave...I think we need to prioritze them as well. Can you translate the priorty from the other e-mails to this? Matt Dave Colasurdo wrote: Excellent feedback from all.. Here is an attempt to consolidate the feedback into one list. (Hope I'm not stepping on anyone's toes.) I've grouped by a few high level categories.. Of course, one could argue that some of the items could fall into multiple categories... Any glaring omissions? Specifications/Functionality -JDK 5 for Geronimo *(11)* -JEE 5 *(3)* Enterprise JavaBeans 3.0 *(5)* Java Servlet 2.5 Java ServerPages 2.1 Java ServerPages Standard Tag Library Java Persistence Architecture (is this part of Java EE?) Java Transaction API (JTA) J2EE Management J2EE Connector Architecture -JAX-WS support *(4)* -GBean improvements (doc, lifecycle, dependencies, dep. injection, ..) *(2)* -Dynamic Queries *(2)* -javax.persistence -annotated session beans. -Support for JSR-168 (Portlet API) -ServiceMix -Maven2 support -service/daemon wrapper -Remove the requirement of the openejb-jar.xml?? -Better db tools in the admin console -Configuration management, possibility to make a production version without some current modules (e.g. OpenEJB or ActiveMQ), there are end users who don't have the resources (memory, disk) to run Geronimo fully equipped and they don't need every feature of the J2EE stack - Continued support of Jetty -First class HttpSession clustering. -More integration with Apache mod_JK/mod_ajp . It would be nice if a request would continue through a pool until it landed on a server with that webapp. -Mass deployment tools that allow the server 'cloning' and rollout mentioned during Geronimos initial days. -Global JNDI ENC Tools * -NetBeans support *(3)* -JDK 5 for launching and running the Geronimo Eclipse plugin *(2)* -Eclipse plugin improvement (it is really good but think it could be better) -Eclipse mini-roadmap (from Sachin) - run resources directly from the workspace, so the ear isn't built and re-packaged on every publish - More control over the runtime/server wizards, publish process, and server management - Continue to build up the UI so we have a complete set of form editors for the G deployment plans - ability to see changes reflected live in something like the Common Navigator as you modify your
Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!
I would at to the other requests: Support for JSR-168 (Portlet API) If memory serves, the Geronimo Console is actually a Portal App, so this is probably already implemented, but I didn't see this documented at http://geronimo.apache.org (which doesn't necessarily mean that it isn't documented, just that I couldn't find it). Ian It's better to be hated for who you are than loved for who you are not Ian D. Stewart Appl Dev Analyst-Advisory, DCS Automation JPMorganChase Global Technology Infrastructure Phone: (614) 244-2564 Pager: (888) 260-0078 Werner Punz [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: user@geronimo.apache.org Sent by: newscc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you! rg 04/04/2006 05:54 AM Please respond to user Dain Sundstrom schrieb: On Mar 28, 2006, at 12:50 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 2) Implementation of J2EE 1.5 (or JEE 5 or whatever we're calling it these days) JEE 5 is a huge cacophony of specifications. Can you be more specific about which specs you would like to see finished first? javax.persistence and the annotated session beans. JSF is probably a plug and play anyway so no reason to have that one there ;-)
Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!
Hi, Jian Liao wrote: Setup something like JBoss Certified Partner Program http://www.jboss.org/partners/program. I would like to see Jetspeed-2 joined Geronimo Certfied Partner Program:) It will encourage more program, opensource project to integrate with Geronimo. - Jian Liao I really don't know why a partner program encourages integration. There are some reasons why we moved to Geronimo. One is that certified thingy, which brings more commercial pressure in development. I really like the open documentation and discussion with geronimo community and committers. No need for privileged certified partners. -Mario
Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!
More documentation/examples for me should be more explicative models of the basic openejb-jar.xml and ejb-jar.xml, explaining which tag points where or what ? Until now I got session beans, entity beans(BMP and CMP) working thanks to Aaron support. Still fighting on Message-Driven-Bean. Best Regards,Olivier VoutatOn 3/29/06, Ueberbach, Michael [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Here are 4 issues (as they just come into my mind)1) Simplifying deployment (some means to generate geronimo deployment plans?) 2) Dynamic queries (as already anounced)3) Shortcuts for building web services4) More minor releases (if possible)kind regardsMichael-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-Von: David Blevins [mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]]Gesendet: Dienstag, 28. März 2006 22:01An: user@geronimo.apache.orgBetreff: User Feedback Request -- this means you! So this is the first of what I think should be a quarterly event.Geronimo is ultimately your project and we committers are but yourhumble servants.To serve you best, we need some critical high level feedback to help us steer the project and focus on what matters mostto you!Please, every user out there, give us your top 5 things we can do tomake Geronimo better for you.Here is my list:1)More interaction with you guys, the users! 2)More frequent releases incorporating more user feedback (smallreleases more often vs. big releases only 4 times a year)3)Less deployment requirements (simpler plans, more defaults, etc.)4)More application validation at deployment 5)More powerful text configurationThat's just to get the ball rolling.More detail is always good ifyou have the time.In general anything you think we need to correctas a community, technical or non-technical.Let us know. If you've ever uttered the words, Geronimo would be such a greatproject if it only then now is your time to shine.We want to hear from everyone!This is not just for the hard-core Geronimo users or J2EE experts.If you are new to J2EE anddownloaded Geronimo and had to give up after an hour of no progress,let us know what we might do!It's all about you.Best Regards, David Blevins-- Olivier Cidiane VoutatRua Praia de Muriú, 9188Cep 59092-390 / Natal - RNTel: (84) 3219-0427 Cel: (84) 9977-3917
Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!
This is my list: 1) Support for JDK 1.52) Geronimo tutorials (How to use Geronimo with: Apache Axis, WSS4J, ActiveMQ). 3) It would be great to have NetBeans support. Thanks, Alberto
Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!
Theres are lots of planned improvements coming... The biggest I think from a user experience is being able to run resources directly from the workspace, so the ear isn't built and re-packaged on every publish. Also, the plugin is built using the Generic Server Framework which restricts some of the stuff we can do, so a good chunk of it will be re-written to move away from this in order to have more control over the runtime/server wizards, publish process, and server management. Finally, we'll need to continue to build up the UI so we have a complete set of form editors for the G deployment plans. This is the basis of what we need and which afterwards we can start getting really fancy with the power of EMF... like the ability to see changes reflected live in something like the Common Navigator as you modify your plans and full synchronization between the source view and views using the model, copy/paste, undo/ redo support. Theres also plans in WTP to improve the Server Tools Framework to make it easier to have more control over what defines your runtime. Is there anything other then this you had in mind? - sachin On Mar 28, 2006, at 9:14 PM, Olivier Voutat wrote: 3) Eclipse plugin improvement (it is really good but think it could be better)
Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!
Oh and of course the problem everyone is running into... launching eclipse with jdk 5 :) - sachin On Mar 29, 2006, at 9:19 AM, Sachin Patel wrote: Theres are lots of planned improvements coming... The biggest I think from a user experience is being able to run resources directly from the workspace, so the ear isn't built and re-packaged on every publish. Also, the plugin is built using the Generic Server Framework which restricts some of the stuff we can do, so a good chunk of it will be re-written to move away from this in order to have more control over the runtime/server wizards, publish process, and server management. Finally, we'll need to continue to build up the UI so we have a complete set of form editors for the G deployment plans. This is the basis of what we need and which afterwards we can start getting really fancy with the power of EMF... like the ability to see changes reflected live in something like the Common Navigator as you modify your plans and full synchronization between the source view and views using the model, copy/paste, undo/redo support. Theres also plans in WTP to improve the Server Tools Framework to make it easier to have more control over what defines your runtime. Is there anything other then this you had in mind? - sachin On Mar 28, 2006, at 9:14 PM, Olivier Voutat wrote: 3) Eclipse plugin improvement (it is really good but think it could be better)
Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!
+1 It's better to be hated for who you are than loved for who you are not Ian D. Stewart Appl Dev Analyst-Advisory, DCS Automation JPMorganChase Global Technology Infrastructure Phone: (614) 244-2564 Pager: (888) 260-0078 Mario Rübsam [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: user@geronimo.apache.org com cc: Subject: Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you! 03/29/2006 03:15 AM Please respond to user Hi, Jian Liao wrote: Setup something like JBoss Certified Partner Program http://www.jboss.org/partners/program. I would like to see Jetspeed-2 joined Geronimo Certfied Partner Program:) It will encourage more program, opensource project to integrate with Geronimo. - Jian Liao I really don't know why a partner program encourages integration. There are some reasons why we moved to Geronimo. One is that certified thingy, which brings more commercial pressure in development. I really like the open documentation and discussion with geronimo community and committers. No need for privileged certified partners. -Mario
Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!
Very excellent feedback everyone! Keep it coming. Don't be shy. And definitely post your top 5 even if someone else has already covered your items. The number of times we see certain things mentioned is a big indicator of demand. -David
Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!
Ok, that's what I need: 1. Support for Java 5 2. Dynamic Queries 3. Remove the requirement of the openejb-jar.xml 4. Easier way to deploy EAR Files 5. EJB 3 /JavaEE 5 David Blevins wrote: Very excellent feedback everyone! Keep it coming. Don't be shy. And definitely post your top 5 even if someone else has already covered your items. The number of times we see certain things mentioned is a big indicator of demand. -David
Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!
Ok, here are my priorities: 1) JDK 1.5 support 2) EJB 3 3) JAX-WS 4) more minor releases 5) More docs on GBeans (explaining its merits and implementation in different scenarios) Regards, Stefan Schmidt David Blevins wrote: So this is the first of what I think should be a quarterly event. Geronimo is ultimately your project and we committers are but your humble servants. To serve you best, we need some critical high level feedback to help us steer the project and focus on what matters most to you! Please, every user out there, give us your top 5 things we can do to make Geronimo better for you. Here is my list: 1) More interaction with you guys, the users! 2) More frequent releases incorporating more user feedback (small releases more often vs. big releases only 4 times a year) 3) Less deployment requirements (simpler plans, more defaults, etc.) 4) More application validation at deployment 5) More powerful text configuration That's just to get the ball rolling. More detail is always good if you have the time. In general anything you think we need to correct as a community, technical or non-technical. Let us know. If you've ever uttered the words, Geronimo would be such a great project if it only then now is your time to shine. We want to hear from everyone! This is not just for the hard-core Geronimo users or J2EE experts. If you are new to J2EE and downloaded Geronimo and had to give up after an hour of no progress, let us know what we might do! It's all about you. Best Regards, David Blevins
User Feedback Request -- this means you!
So this is the first of what I think should be a quarterly event. Geronimo is ultimately your project and we committers are but your humble servants. To serve you best, we need some critical high level feedback to help us steer the project and focus on what matters most to you! Please, every user out there, give us your top 5 things we can do to make Geronimo better for you. Here is my list: 1) More interaction with you guys, the users! 2) More frequent releases incorporating more user feedback (small releases more often vs. big releases only 4 times a year) 3) Less deployment requirements (simpler plans, more defaults, etc.) 4) More application validation at deployment 5) More powerful text configuration That's just to get the ball rolling. More detail is always good if you have the time. In general anything you think we need to correct as a community, technical or non-technical. Let us know. If you've ever uttered the words, Geronimo would be such a great project if it only then now is your time to shine. We want to hear from everyone! This is not just for the hard-core Geronimo users or J2EE experts. If you are new to J2EE and downloaded Geronimo and had to give up after an hour of no progress, let us know what we might do! It's all about you. Best Regards, David Blevins
Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!
Here are my top five, with the caveat that the order does not necessarily reflect relative priority, just the order that I think of them: 1) Support for JDK1.5 (both for Geronimo itself and the Geronimo Eclipse Plugin) 2) Implementation of J2EE 1.5 (or JEE 5 or whatever we're calling it these days) 3) Migration path from Tomcat to Geronimo 4) More Documentation (HOWTO's, Tutorials, Cookbooks, etc) 5) And I'll go ahead and second David's #2, more frequent minor releases Ian It's better to be hated for who you are than loved for who you are not Ian D. Stewart Appl Dev Analyst-Advisory, DCS Automation JPMorganChase Global Technology Infrastructure Phone: (614) 244-2564 Pager: (888) 260-0078 David Blevins [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: user@geronimo.apache.org si.com cc: Subject: User Feedback Request -- this means you! 03/28/2006 03:00 PM Please respond to user So this is the first of what I think should be a quarterly event. Geronimo is ultimately your project and we committers are but your humble servants. To serve you best, we need some critical high level feedback to help us steer the project and focus on what matters most to you! Please, every user out there, give us your top 5 things we can do to make Geronimo better for you. Here is my list: 1) More interaction with you guys, the users! 2) More frequent releases incorporating more user feedback (small releases more often vs. big releases only 4 times a year) 3) Less deployment requirements (simpler plans, more defaults, etc.) 4) More application validation at deployment 5) More powerful text configuration That's just to get the ball rolling. More detail is always good if you have the time. In general anything you think we need to correct as a community, technical or non-technical. Let us know. If you've ever uttered the words, Geronimo would be such a great project if it only then now is your time to shine. We want to hear from everyone! This is not just for the hard-core Geronimo users or J2EE experts. If you are new to J2EE and downloaded Geronimo and had to give up after an hour of no progress, let us know what we might do! It's all about you. Best Regards, David Blevins
Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!
On Mar 28, 2006, at 12:50 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 2) Implementation of J2EE 1.5 (or JEE 5 or whatever we're calling it these days) JEE 5 is a huge cacophony of specifications. Can you be more specific about which specs you would like to see finished first? -dain
Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!
This is my personal order based on 1) what I'm using today, and 2) Where I see potential for use in the near future. Obviously, others will have their own priorities. 1) Java Servlet 2.5 2) Java ServerPages 2.1 3) Java ServerPages Standard Tag Library 4) Java Persistence Architecture (is this part of Java EE?) 5) Java Transaction API (JTA) 6) J2EE Management 7) Enterprise JavaBeans 3.0 8) J2EE Connector Architecture Ian It's better to be hated for who you are than loved for who you are not Ian D. Stewart Appl Dev Analyst-Advisory, DCS Automation JPMorganChase Global Technology Infrastructure Phone: (614) 244-2564 Pager: (888) 260-0078 Dain Sundstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: user@geronimo.apache.org cc: 03/28/2006 04:05 Subject: Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you! PM Please respond to user On Mar 28, 2006, at 12:50 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 2) Implementation of J2EE 1.5 (or JEE 5 or whatever we're calling it these days) JEE 5 is a huge cacophony of specifications. Can you be more specific about which specs you would like to see finished first? -dain
RE: User Feedback Request -- this means you!
Here you go, 1- Java 5.0 standard edition support 2- Java 5.0 standard edition support 3- Convince us with the GBean Architecture 4- Return back ServiceMix 5- At least EJB 3.0 and JAX-WS support Thanks, Hossam Karim -Original Message- From: David Blevins [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2006 10:01 PM To: user@geronimo.apache.org Subject: User Feedback Request -- this means you! So this is the first of what I think should be a quarterly event. Geronimo is ultimately your project and we committers are but your humble servants. To serve you best, we need some critical high level feedback to help us steer the project and focus on what matters most to you! Please, every user out there, give us your top 5 things we can do to make Geronimo better for you. Here is my list: 1) More interaction with you guys, the users! 2) More frequent releases incorporating more user feedback (small releases more often vs. big releases only 4 times a year) 3) Less deployment requirements (simpler plans, more defaults, etc.) 4) More application validation at deployment 5) More powerful text configuration That's just to get the ball rolling. More detail is always good if you have the time. In general anything you think we need to correct as a community, technical or non-technical. Let us know. If you've ever uttered the words, Geronimo would be such a great project if it only then now is your time to shine. We want to hear from everyone! This is not just for the hard-core Geronimo users or J2EE experts. If you are new to J2EE and downloaded Geronimo and had to give up after an hour of no progress, let us know what we might do! It's all about you. Best Regards, David Blevins
RE: User Feedback Request -- this means you!
I have three requests: (1) More tutorials and example code for _everything_. (2) More detailed documentation about the architecture. (3) A browsable table describing where to find all plans, etc. for each deployed component or service. Thanks, Joel -Original Message- From: David Blevins [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2006 12:01 PM To: user@geronimo.apache.org Subject: User Feedback Request -- this means you! So this is the first of what I think should be a quarterly event. Geronimo is ultimately your project and we committers are but your humble servants. To serve you best, we need some critical high level feedback to help us steer the project and focus on what matters most to you! Please, every user out there, give us your top 5 things we can do to make Geronimo better for you. Here is my list: 1) More interaction with you guys, the users! 2) More frequent releases incorporating more user feedback (small releases more often vs. big releases only 4 times a year) 3) Less deployment requirements (simpler plans, more defaults, etc.) 4) More application validation at deployment 5) More powerful text configuration That's just to get the ball rolling. More detail is always good if you have the time. In general anything you think we need to correct as a community, technical or non-technical. Let us know. If you've ever uttered the words, Geronimo would be such a great project if it only then now is your time to shine. We want to hear from everyone! This is not just for the hard-core Geronimo users or J2EE experts. If you are new to J2EE and downloaded Geronimo and had to give up after an hour of no progress, let us know what we might do! It's all about you. Best Regards, David Blevins
Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!
Well, I'm not a reference but my five are:1) More documentation and example codes (and more understanding, sorry, but it needs to be more clear for stupid newbies as me)2) Java 5.0 support3) Eclipse plugin improvement (it is really good but think it could be better) 4) and more documentation5) and more documentation (can't figure out something else)Best Regards,Olivier VoutatOn 3/28/06, Joel Bock [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have three requests:(1) More tutorials and example code for _everything_.(2) More detailed documentation about the architecture.(3) A browsable table describing where to find all plans, etc. for eachdeployed component or service. Thanks,Joel-Original Message-From: David Blevins [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2006 12:01 PMTo: user@geronimo.apache.orgSubject: User Feedback Request -- this means you!So this is the first of what I think should be a quarterly event.Geronimo is ultimately your project and we committers are but your humble servants.To serve you best, we need some critical high levelfeedback to help us steer the project and focus on what matters mostto you!Please, every user out there, give us your top 5 things we can do to make Geronimo better for you.Here is my list:1)More interaction with you guys, the users!2)More frequent releases incorporating more user feedback (smallreleases more often vs. big releases only 4 times a year) 3)Less deployment requirements (simpler plans, more defaults, etc.)4)More application validation at deployment5)More powerful text configurationThat's just to get the ball rolling.More detail is always good if you have the time.In general anything you think we need to correctas a community, technical or non-technical.Let us know.If you've ever uttered the words, Geronimo would be such a greatproject if it only then now is your time to shine. We want to hear from everyone!This is not just for the hard-coreGeronimo users or J2EE experts.If you are new to J2EE anddownloaded Geronimo and had to give up after an hour of no progress, let us know what we might do!It's all about you.Best Regards,David Blevins-- Olivier Cidiane VoutatRua Praia de Muriú, 9188 Cep 59092-390 / Natal - RNTel: (84) 3219-0427 Cel: (84) 9977-3917
Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!
Hi there, here is my Top 5: 1. Support for JDK1.5 2. JAX-WS support 3. More documentation 4. NetBeans support 5. More frequent releases Thanks Christian
Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!
For everyone that listed more documentation, can you be more specific? It will help us prioritize the effort to hit the most important stuff first. Thanks, -dain On Mar 28, 2006, at 10:31 PM, mikael-aronsson wrote: Same as below for me - Original Message - From: Christian Stolz [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: user@geronimo.apache.org Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2006 7:36 AM Subject: Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you! Hi there, here is my Top 5: 1. Support for JDK1.5 2. JAX-WS support 3. More documentation 4. NetBeans support 5. More frequent releases Thanks Christian
