search

OpenLiberty / open-liberty

Open Liberty is a highly composable, fast to start, dynamic application server runtime environment
https://openliberty.io
Eclipse Public License 2.0
1.16k stars 599 forks source link

Jakarta RESTful Web Services 3.0 #11803

Closed andymc12 closed 3 years ago

andymc12 commented 4 years ago

Describe the high level feature, including any external spec links. This will be the epic issue for Jakarta RESTful Web Services (aka JAX-RS) 3.0, part of the EE 9 effort covered by Epic issue #9876.

The 3.0 spec adds little more than some behavior clarifications over the 2.1 spec, but we may be changing the implementation of the 3.0 spec.

When ready, add links to the Upcoming Feature Overview document and Feature Test Summary issue:

Instructions:

Design

Before Development Starts or 8 weeks before Onboarding

Legal

3 weeks before Onboarding

Translation

3 weeks before Onboarding

Feature Complete

2 weeks before Onboarding

Focal Point Approvals

2 to 1 week before Onboarding

You MUST have the Design Approved or No Design Approved label before requesting focal point approvals.

All features (both "Design Approved" and "No Design Approved")

"Design Approved" features

Ready for GA

1 week before Onboarding

Other deliverbles

WhiteCat22 commented 4 years ago

Tasks:

andymc12 commented 4 years ago

UFO Review today - updated slides available at: https://ibm.box.com/s/6tfnxuor042psbtu76k85p0qcd0pzpq0

mbroz2 commented 4 years ago

UFO Review Feedback: Slide 17; Firm statement regarding JAX-RS 2.X Config continuing to work. Slide 25: Include performance metrics/improvements in the Beta & GA Blog posts. Slide 26: Update the Java certification requirement Slide 28: RESTEasy has less trace then CXF. We'll add trace over time as we participate in RESTEasy (as we had done for CXF).

malincoln commented 3 years ago

@NottyCode can you approve the design request? Thanks

malincoln commented 3 years ago

@andymc12 pls add FAT summary to overall epic here: https://github.com/OpenLiberty/open-liberty/issues/12969

andymc12 commented 3 years ago

Checkpoint Meeting 2021-04-16: Epic Issue: https://github.com/OpenLiberty/open-liberty/issues/11803

First, what we've accomplished:

What we have left to do (taken from the epic):

FAT buckets in WS-CD-Open that are not in OL:

[Andy] Verify DCUT and GA dates

donbourne commented 3 years ago

Serviceability Approval Comment - Please answer the following questions for serviceability approval:

  1. UFO -- does the UFO identify the most likely problems customers will see and identify how the feature will enable them to diagnose and solve those problems without resorting to raising a PMR? Have these issues been addressed in the implementation?

Yes, behavior changes between 2.X (CXF) and 3.0 (RESTEasy) that are not strictly defined by the spec are the most likely problems that customers will see. We have addressed many and attempted to minimize the behavior changes that customers will see - we have also contributed back some serviceability related changes to the RESTEasy community.

  1. Test and Demo -- As part of the serviceability process we're asking feature teams to test and analyze common problem paths for serviceability and demo those problem paths to someone not involved in the development of the feature (eg. L2, test team, or another development team).
    a) What problem paths were tested and demonstrated? Mismatched mapping between code and URLs and issues with processing HTTP requests/responses were demonstrated. b) Who did you demo to? Jim Krueger demonstrated to Swati / L2. c) Do the people you demo'd to agree that the serviceability of the demonstrated problem scenarios is sufficient to avoid PMRs for any problems customers are likely to encounter, or that L2 should be able to quickly address those problems without need to engage L3? Yes

  2. SVT -- SVT team is often the first team to try new features and often encounters problems setting up and using them. Note that we're not expecting SVT to do full serviceability testing -- just to sign-off on the serviceability of the problem paths they encountered. a) Who conducted SVT tests for this feature? Brian/Jag/Rumana b) Do they agree that the serviceability of the problems they encountered is sufficient to avoid PMRs, or that L2 should be able to quickly address those problems without need to engage L3? Yes, serviceability of any problems encountered was sufficient to avoid PMRs or L2 should be able to quickly address the problems without L3.

  3. Which L2 / L3 queues will handle PMRs for this feature? WASWIN (formerly WASWEB) and WL3JRS Ensure they are present in the contact reference file and in the queue contact summary, and that the respective L2/L3 teams know they are supporting it. Ask Don Bourne if you need links or more info. Confirmed

  4. Does this feature add any new metrics or emit any new JSON events? Yes, but in the same vain as former JAX-RS releases If yes, have you updated the JMX metrics reference list / Metrics reference list / JSON log events reference list in the Open Liberty docs? The restfulWS-3.0 features provides the same metrics as jaxrs-2.1 via the monitor feature, but note that it does not provide any metrics via MicroProfile metrics - that support will come as part of MP 5.0.

skasund commented 3 years ago

L2 has requested STE slides for this feature. The STE template can be found at the links below. You can use either one to create the education.

Slide Template: https://ibm.box.com/s/1an42g7zdgmaj84w7dft0indqfgi8ffm

Github Template: https://pages.github.ibm.com/WASL3/site/STE/about

Please upload the completed slides to the same 'STE Archive' BOX folder or provide me the Github link. Thanks!

andymc12 commented 3 years ago

Doc/ID issue https://github.com/OpenLiberty/docs/issues/4825 opened.

skasund commented 3 years ago

Thanks for completing the STE. I've provided the approval.

chirp1 commented 3 years ago

Approving. Doc issue at https://github.com/OpenLiberty/docs/issues/4825 has info needed.

WhiteCat22 commented 3 years ago

We did it! Good job team!