|
| 1 | +--- |
| 2 | +title: Roadmap |
| 3 | +description: Public roadmap for Powertools for AWS Lambda (.NET) |
| 4 | +--- |
| 5 | + |
| 6 | +<!-- markdownlint-disable MD043 --> |
| 7 | + |
1 | 8 | ## Overview
|
2 | 9 |
|
3 |
| -This is our public roadmap that outlines the high level direction we are working towards, namely [Themes](#themes). We update this document when our priorities change: security and stability is our top priority. |
| 10 | +Our public roadmap outlines the high level direction we are working towards. We update this document when our priorities change: security and stability are our top priority. |
| 11 | + |
| 12 | +!!! info "For most up-to-date information, see our [board of activities](https://github.com/orgs/aws-powertools/projects/6/views/14?query=is%3Aopen+sort%3Aupdated-desc){target="_blank"}." |
| 13 | + |
| 14 | +### Key areas |
| 15 | + |
| 16 | +Security and operational excellence take precedence above all else. This means bug fixing, stability, customer's support, and internal compliance may delay one or more key areas below. |
| 17 | + |
| 18 | +**Missing something or want us to prioritize an existing area?** |
| 19 | + |
| 20 | +You can help us prioritize by [upvoting existing feature requests](https://github.com/aws-powertools/powertools-lambda-dotnet/issues?q=is%3Aissue%20state%3Aopen%20label%3Afeature-request){target="_blank"}, leaving a comment on what use cases it could unblock for you, and by joining our discussions on Discord. |
| 21 | + |
| 22 | +[](https://discord.gg/B8zZKbbyET){target="_blank"} |
| 23 | + |
| 24 | +### Core Utilities (P0) |
| 25 | + |
| 26 | +#### Logging V2 |
| 27 | + |
| 28 | +Modernizing our logging capabilities to align with .NET practices and improve developer experience. |
| 29 | + |
| 30 | +- [ ] Logger buffer implementation |
| 31 | +- [ ] New .NET-friendly API design (Serilog-like patterns) |
| 32 | +- [ ] Filtering and JMESPath expression support |
| 33 | +- [ ] Documentation for SDK context.Logger vs Powertools Logger differences |
| 34 | + |
| 35 | +#### Metrics V2 |
| 36 | + |
| 37 | +Updating metrics implementation to support latest EMF specifications and improve performance. |
| 38 | + |
| 39 | +- [ ] Update to latest EMF specifications |
| 40 | +- [ ] Breaking changes implementation for multiple dimensions |
| 41 | +- [ ] Add support for default dimensions on ColdStart metric |
| 42 | +- [ ] API updates - missing functionality that is present in Python implementation (ie: flush_metrics) |
| 43 | + |
| 44 | +### Security and Production Readiness (P1) |
| 45 | + |
| 46 | +Ensuring enterprise-grade security and compatibility with latest .NET developments. |
| 47 | + |
| 48 | +- [ ] .NET 10 support from day one |
| 49 | +- [ ] Deprecation path for .NET 6 |
| 50 | +- [ ] Scorecard implementation |
| 51 | +- [ ] Security compliance checks on our pipeline |
| 52 | +- [ ] All utilities with end-to-end tests in our pipeline |
| 53 | + |
| 54 | +### Feature Parity and ASP.NET Support (P2) |
4 | 55 |
|
5 |
| -[See our latest list of activities »](https://github.com/orgs/aws-powertools/projects/6/views/4?query=is%3Aopen+sort%3Aupdated-desc){target="_blank"} |
| 56 | +#### Feature Parity |
6 | 57 |
|
7 |
| -## Themes |
| 58 | +Implementing key features to achieve parity with other Powertools implementations. |
8 | 59 |
|
9 |
| -!!! info "Operational Excellence is priority number 1." |
| 60 | +- [ ] Data masking |
| 61 | +- [ ] Feature Flags |
| 62 | +- [ ] S3 Streaming support |
10 | 63 |
|
11 |
| -Themes are key activities maintainers are focusing on, besides bug reports. These are updated periodically and you can get an idea of the overall progress in the [Milestones section](https://github.com/aws-powertools/powertools-lambda-dotnet/milestones){target="_blank"}. |
| 64 | +#### ASP.NET Support |
12 | 65 |
|
13 |
| -### New utilities |
| 66 | +Adding first-class support for ASP.NET Core in Lambda with performance considerations. |
14 | 67 |
|
15 |
| -After going GA, we want to start working on new utilities, specifically but not limited to the most commonly asked: **(1)** [Idempotency](https://github.com/aws-powertools/powertools-lambda-dotnet/issues/164), **(2)** [Parameters](https://github.com/aws-powertools/powertools-lambda-dotnet/issues/160) and **(3)** [Batch](https://github.com/aws-powertools/powertools-lambda-dotnet/issues/168). |
| 68 | +- [ ] AspNetCoreServer.Hosting - [Tracking issue](https://github.com/aws-powertools/powertools-lambda-dotnet/issues/360){target="_blank"} |
| 69 | +- [ ] Minimal APIs support |
| 70 | +- [ ] ASP.NET Core integration |
| 71 | +- [ ] Documentation for cold start impacts |
| 72 | +- [ ] Clear guidance on Middleware vs. Decorators usage |
16 | 73 |
|
17 |
| -### Improve operational excellence |
| 74 | +#### Improve operational excellence |
18 | 75 |
|
19 | 76 | We continue to work on increasing operational excellence to remove as much undifferentiated heavylifting for maintainers, so that we can focus on delivering features that help you.
|
20 | 77 |
|
@@ -61,9 +118,9 @@ graph LR
|
61 | 118 | Our end-to-end mechanism follows four major steps:
|
62 | 119 |
|
63 | 120 | * **Feature Request**. Ideas start with a [feature request](https://github.com/aws-powertools/powertools-lambda-dotnet/issues/new?assignees=&labels=feature-request%2Ctriage&projects=&template=feature_request.yml&title=Feature+request%3A+TITLE){target="_blank"} to outline their use case at a high level. For complex use cases, maintainers might ask for/write a RFC.
|
64 |
| - * Maintainers review requests based on [project tenets](index.md#tenets){target="_blank"}, customers reaction (👍), and use cases. |
| 121 | + * Maintainers review requests based on [project tenets](index.md#tenets){target="_blank"}, customers reaction (👍), and use cases. |
65 | 122 | * **Request-for-comments (RFC)**. Design proposals use our [RFC issue template](https://github.com/aws-powertools/powertools-lambda-dotnet/issues/new?assignees=&labels=RFC%2Ctriage&projects=&template=rfc.yml&title=RFC%3A+TITLE){target="_blank"} to describe its implementation, challenges, developer experience, dependencies, and alternative solutions.
|
66 |
| - * This helps refine the initial idea with community feedback before a decision is made. |
| 123 | + * This helps refine the initial idea with community feedback before a decision is made. |
67 | 124 | * **Decision**. After carefully reviewing and discussing them, maintainers make a final decision on whether to start implementation, defer or reject it, and update everyone with the next steps.
|
68 | 125 | * **Implementation**. For approved features, maintainers give priority to the original authors for implementation unless it is a sensitive task that is best handled by maintainers.
|
69 | 126 |
|
|
0 commit comments