CodeOne MP BoF

[Ken Finnigan]

I've put together a draft of some slides for the CodeOne MP BoF [1].

Edwin/Emily, and everyone, please let me know what you think.

Ken

[1] - https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/150Uwu4CglMVbjk7UsvPeNuN4xWK1oP09CLXHCKDJEZE/edit?usp=sharing

[John Clingan]

I plan to be there. Thanks for putting this together.

Here is the important thing about a BOF. Very few slides, lots of attendee interaction. I was pretty bummed at a few BOFs at conferences where it was really just another session (including MicroProfile BOFs, IMHO). Let's focus on discussion with topical slides. I think the release slides are fine, although I think we should consolidate them into a single timeline slide (I can help with that if I'm given write access) and also talk about new specs here. This should literally be no more than 10 minutes in total.

The Jakarta EE section is a good one and more time should be set aside for that. In fact, an agenda slide with "big topics" up front would be nice because we may get ahead of ourselves.

We should discuss what to do about a "core platform" (growing pains). We have quite a few reactive specs not in the core platform plus the new ones. I think we should update this deck to reflect this discussion.

Recommended time split (and I can be a timekeeper if desired):

History/Timeline + new spec overview: 10 minutes

Jakarta EE alignment: 20 minute discussion

Core Platform spec adoption: 15 minute discussion

If time left over, additional topics. Thoughts on this approach?

[Edwin Derks]

Hi all,

Thanks for setting up the slides Ken, and John for getting involved as well. I also think that we should merge the slides to a more compact fashion. The timeline and what's in store for MP is great of course, especially since that is the title of this BOF. So having this completely covered shouldn't be a problem IMO. I can also (suggest) update the slides if you like.

I like the proposed time slots John, to have a program set up that we can follow. However, are we going to stick to no matter what the questions from/discussions with the audience are, or do we want to let the slots go when discussion with the audience is going on? I just would like to know how you guys see this to align with you there.

In my experience from conferences and everyday life, some ever returning questions can be asked by the audience that can consume an ample amount of time:

- what is a microservice?

- when is MicroProfile going to merge with Jakarta EE?

- which implementation of MicroProfile should I use?

- why shouldn't I use Spring Boot instead?

I would at least like to prepare myself to have an answer to these kinds of questions, but I would like to know how much time we would like to spend on questions not directly related to the topics of the BOF.

Please let me know your thoughts, and hopefully see you soon at CodeOne. :)

Kind regards,

Edwin

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Eclipse MicroProfile" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to microprofile...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/microprofile/7231db1b-0e40-4078-b3b1-5354d78173d7%40googlegroups.com.

[Amelia Eiras]

+ 1 to Ken wonderful initiative of putting together the BoF slides draft for MicroProfilers' review. 

+ 1 John on policing time and making the Bof not about a few just talking but about MicroProfilers connecting in person instead of the Community hangout. 

About slides: super quick as i am on the run today--- :) 

lets cut slides to half. Add links that refer to git repos & anything not necessary-- please just cut it out.

I have added a few comments to the slides. Bias-- when I see a slide that just informs me of stuff and it doesn't enable me to do stuff on OSS projects, i find that page worthless. Can we leave slides that add value instead of just informing?  My mind goes to those who know nothing about MP and those who know lots. 

See you all pretty soon, 

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to microprofile+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

[Rhuan Henrique]

Hi,

I have seen one question in my presentations many times. "What is the real benefit of working with a umbrella project based in spec (like Microprofile) in a Microservice architecture?"

Thank you!

Rhuan Rocha

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to microprofile...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/microprofile/7231db1b-0e40-4078-b3b1-5354d78173d7%40googlegroups.com.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Eclipse MicroProfile" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to microprofile...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/microprofile/bd5029b2-7b17-45aa-9556-7bb11d2b4b34%40googlegroups.com.

[Ken Finnigan]

I've updated the slides based on the feedback:

• I added the timeline slide of releases instead, just needed minor updating from RH Summit
• Shortened the "upcoming" mentions to a single brief slide
• Added a section on growing pains, including some questions to pose and get feedback on

Ken

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/microprofile/CA%2BZAF_anL8hvQRqizJXmhOkbT%3DBjR88uXnCagAw5wM90cDfHNg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Edwin Derks]

Hey Ken,

Looks good to me. One question though: do we need to include an item for Java 11 support? Or will we cover that when a question comes up?

Edwin

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/microprofile/CAKeeVe7jj%3DVpzvg-uBfqCgcckeShTfs%3DUXxe9xukFSWWdFxfSg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Ken Finnigan]

Depends on what you mean by Java 11 support? There's currently 3 different issues covering various levels of what we need to do in MP.

Or are you wanting to ask whether MP should move to use JDK 11 as a base instead of JDK 8?

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/microprofile/CAE35TCMsEuPRtYmmceKBvoNLKgLTqpCnUhg9hpn3Ncy%2B6%2BAhWA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Edwin Derks]

Hi Ken,

I might be overlooking the third one, but I'm referring to these open Github issues:

https://github.com/eclipse/microprofile/issues/106

https://github.com/eclipse/microprofile/issues/107

In there we are discussing how (long) to support JDK8 and whether/when we want to up the baseline version for MicroProfile to JDK11. Very valid and interesting topic imho, but do we want to explicitly add this topic to the slides for this BOF? Since we are talking about the future of MPO, I don't think we should leave this out. I don't know why, but I feel questions coming from the audience about this topic, whether we add it or not.

Please let me know what you think.

Edwin

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/microprofile/CAKeeVe5JzaXC6TT5Zh8tpuBkDFs1FNHZAto5%3DRR1krUmMAc0cg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Ken Finnigan]

On Mon, Sep 9, 2019 at 10:04 AM Edwin Derks <eder...@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi Ken,

I might be overlooking the third one, but I'm referring to these open Github issues:

https://github.com/eclipse/microprofile/issues/106

The above issue is actually split into 3 separate issues, which is what I was referring to.

 

https://github.com/eclipse/microprofile/issues/107

In there we are discussing how (long) to support JDK8 and whether/when we want to up the baseline version for MicroProfile to JDK11. Very valid and interesting topic imho, but do we want to explicitly add this topic to the slides for this BOF? Since we are talking about the future of MPO, I don't think we should leave this out. I don't know why, but I feel questions coming from the audience about this topic, whether we add it or not.

It's an interesting topic and one that needs to be discussed, but I think we can just bring it up at the BoF either if someone asks about it or we have extra time. 

I say that because Jakarta EE and what the platform is could be enough discussion to take up all the time.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/microprofile/CAE35TCP1TFB7kpvdrdwWPQi9FPOO4KVPTySmQjJ_syW%3D%3Dr9FVA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Edwin Derks]

That is fine Ken, thanks!

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/microprofile/CAKeeVe4-citKU%2B7BQ5Q5FQSpG3ZcbXct8r0ApCc4hAB%2Bd97NFQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Emily Jiang]

Thank you Ken for getting the slides before me! I agree with the discussion points. I added one slide on mp starter and added a couple of bulletin points on Jakarta EE and MicroProfile relationship discussion.

Emily