JCache 2.0 BOF Proposal

40 views
Skip to first unread message

Chris Dennis

unread,
Apr 29, 2015, 5:39:28 PM4/29/15
to jsr...@googlegroups.com
Hi All,

As I discussed in the thread on the new async branch, I think it would be
a good idea to try and organize a BoF session at JavaOne to discuss the
future direction(s) and features that should or might be included in a
JCache 2.0 JSR. As such I had planned on trying to do a decent job of
proposing something today so that it would be in before the JavaOne
deadline. Now that the deadline has been extended until May 6th however
it would appear there is time to attempt to get something hashed out on
the list so that it represent everyones thoughts as well as is possible.
This is what I currently have:

Title: Jcache 2.0 : Where do we go from here?
Abstract (721 characters):
The Java caching standard (JSR-107) was finally released in 2014 after 13
years of on-and-off work. The caching community has already started to
move on, however. There is already discussion of what is missing from the
current standard, and what could or should be included in a JCache 2.0.
The JSR-107 Specification Leads and Expert Group members would like to
engage the community in an open discussion on JCache 2.0. What important
features are missing from JSR-107? What usecases should a future JCache
2.0 support? What features would be required to support those usecases?
Attend, get your voice heard, and engage directly with the rest of the
caching community to help define the genesis of a JCache 2.0 standard.


Presentation Summary (this is only visible to the program committee):
The JSR-107 standard was pushed through to final in 2014, but many among
the spec leads, expert group and engaged community were unhappy that many
features had to be ignored or abandoned in order to achieve
standardization in a reasonable timeline. There is desire amongst the
community to start work on a version 2.0 of the API that includes many of
these feature that were left out of scope in 107, and potentially other
features that would allow for a richer specification overall. Examples of
features that are being discussed or considered by various parties are:
asynchronous operations, richer distributed caching support, capacity
constraints, and (XA) transactions. We, the JSR-107 Spec Leads and EG
would like to use this BOF slot as an opportunity to engage with
interested members of the community to help define a strong and cohesive
high level direction for JCache 2.0.

I’d be interested in any input people have to help refine what I’ve
started with, or even just +1’s if you agree so that I can more honestly
use the term “caching community”.


Thanks,

Chris Dennis

Terracotta/Software AG EG Member


Ben Cotton

unread,
Apr 29, 2015, 5:52:06 PM4/29/15
to jsr...@googlegroups.com
Nice work, Chris. Thanks.

Sent from my iPhone
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "jsr107" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to jsr107+un...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Greg Luck

unread,
Apr 30, 2015, 2:32:43 PM4/30/15
to jsr...@googlegroups.com
Looks good Chris.

Regards

Greg Luck

skype: gregrluck
yahoo: gregrluck
mobile: +61 408 061 622

Manik Surtani

unread,
Apr 30, 2015, 2:42:36 PM4/30/15
to jsr...@googlegroups.com
+1

Noctarius

unread,
Apr 30, 2015, 2:51:41 PM4/30/15
to jsr...@googlegroups.com
+1

Brian Oliver

unread,
Apr 30, 2015, 3:08:45 PM4/30/15
to jsr...@googlegroups.com
+1
 
Hey Chris,

Let me know if you want/need help submitting.  Sometimes a joint submission (happy to jointly submit) helps the submission process / evaluation, though I'm sure the topic itself speaks for itself.

I can also submit the BOF through the Java EE Platform group to add some additional weight to the submission.

Cheers

-- Brian

Chris Dennis

unread,
Apr 30, 2015, 4:56:35 PM4/30/15
to jsr...@googlegroups.com
Thanks Brian, I’ll probably name you as a second speaker then.  Right now I don’t know how many speakers I can name for a BOF – if I’m allowed 3 I’ll add Greg as well (assuming that’s okay with you Greg?).  I’ll definitely make sure to mention the people who +1’d here on the presentation summary as well so that the committee are aware that the wider EG is in support of the session as well.

Chris

Steve Millidge

unread,
Apr 30, 2015, 5:30:12 PM4/30/15
to jsr...@googlegroups.com

I should be at JavaOne so would love to come along.

Jens Wilke

unread,
May 5, 2015, 11:23:32 AM5/5/15
to jsr...@googlegroups.com, Chris Dennis
Chris,

+1, well done!

Best,

Jens
--
"Everything superfluous is wrong!"

// Jens Wilke - headissue GmbH - Germany
\// http://www.headissue.com

Chris Dennis

unread,
May 5, 2015, 5:47:24 PM5/5/15
to jsr...@googlegroups.com
Thanks all,

I have now submitted this to the CfP. I included myself and Brian as
speakers, unfortunately I was limited to two speakers so this had to be
it. I do hope however that any of us who are present attend, the speakers
don’t really mean much here tbh. Fingers crossed for an acceptance, and a
successful session.

Chris

galderz

unread,
May 7, 2015, 12:21:15 PM5/7/15
to jsr...@googlegroups.com
+1

Werner Keil

unread,
May 8, 2015, 9:45:25 AM5/8/15
to jsr...@googlegroups.com
Sounds good.


I'll be at JavaOne so unless other talks including my own overlap (or the BOF is scheduled far too late;-) I guess I'll come by if they accept it.
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages