Agree on all counts, though I'm still catching up with the rest of the conversation after vacation.
--
Jevgeni Kabanov
Founder & CTO of ZeroTurnaround
http://twitter.com/ekabanov
On Wednesday, June 15, 2011 at 3:15 , liming wrote:
> Adam,
> All your thoughts are totally agreed.
> The specs should describe unify IaaS model, API like jclouds.
>
> -----邮件原件-----
> 发件人: Adam Bien [mailto:abien_at_adam-bien.com]
> 发送时间: 2011年6月15日 3:09
> 收件人: jsr342-experts_at_javaee-spec.java.net (mailto:jsr342-experts_at_javaee-spec.java.net)
> 主题: [jsr342-experts] Re: Support for the Platform as a Service model
>
> First thoughts:
>
> 1. With "DevOps" we get less roles in projects, not more.
> 2. The old J2EE roles were not practiced that way. They led to superfluous
> indirections (e.g indirect JNDI lookups, fixed in Java EE 6).
> 3. For clouds we need a standardized provisioning API. Something like:
> http://kenai.com/projects/suncloudapis/pages/HelloCloud but for Java EE 7.
> 4. Application scoped resources (as implemented in GF 3.1) are the right way
> to go - but should be standardized and extended.
> 5. RESTful management (concurrent transactions, load, # of commits, # of
> rollbacks). We should modernize JSR-77. Eg. JPA is no more mentioned JSR
> 77... http://www.jcp.org/en/jsr/summary?id=77
> 6. Now it is not possible to configure the resources of the application
> server from a CI environment. Glassfish comes with proprietary REST-API (a
> good start), but it isn't possible e.g. to deploy drivers via REST. IMHO a
> full configuration and provisioning via JMX exposed via REST is
> crucial.Otherwise "Continuous Deployment/Delivery" cannot be achieved in a
> standard way.
> 7. Application versioning / activation / deactivation should be standardized
> as well. Again - GF 3.1 functionality is a good start.
>
> Application isolation etc. are important, but from my (limited project view)
> the items above are even interesting for sunny (=without clouds :-))
> projects,
>
> Just my observation.
>
> Sorry for the many GF examples, but I use GF in most of my projects. It
> seems like JBoss 7, however, will get similar features :-)
>
> cheers,
>
> adam
>
> On 13.06.2011, at 20:55, Linda DeMichiel wrote:
>
> > I like to thank everyone who has sent feedback on our proposal for
> > Java EE 7 support for the Platform as a Service model.
> >
> > Now that you all hopefully have had time to study it, we'd like to hear
> > from the rest of you, and to solicit any further more-detailed comments.
> >
> > I've uploaded a copy to the Documents area of the project, so you
> > can find it there as well
> (http://java.net/projects/javaee-spec/downloads).
> >
> > thanks,
> >
> > -Linda
> >
> >
> > On 5/25/2011 11:24 AM, Linda DeMichiel wrote:
> > > Greetings,
> > >
> > > As described in our JSR proposal,
> http://jcp.org/en/jsr/proposalDetails?id=342,
> > > the main theme for Java EE 7 is enabling the Java EE Platform for use
> > > in the cloud.
> > >
> > > We'd like to kick off our technical work with a discussion of what is
> > > entailed in terms of the Java EE 7 Platform's support for the Platform
> > > as a Service model (PaaS) and support for multi-tenancy.
> > >
> > > As a starting point, we've prepared the attached document to facilitate
> > > the discussion. This document addresses several aspects that need your
> > > consideration:
> > >
> > > - It attempts to establish a common terminology for our discussions;
> > >
> > > - It attempts to characterize how the "roles" distinguished by the
> > > Java EE Platform might be expanded to support PaaS;
> > >
> > > - It describes a variety of PaaS scenarios that we believe we should
> support;
> > >
> > > - It expands upon the issue of multi-tenant use of PaaS applications in
> > > terms of support for a limited form of SaaS, and what might be entailed
> > > by support for such use.
> > >
> > > We would appreciate if you would review this document in detail and post
> > > your feedback -- both on the general direction indicated, and on the
> > > specifics. There are also a number of issues flagged in the text. We
> > > realize that some of these will require further exploration in order
> > > to be resolved, but of course please feel free to post feedback on any
> > > of these as well.
> > >
> > > thanks,
> > >
> > > -Linda