I'm currently in a very challenging DevOps environment, where Tomcat or
Jetty is not enough:-D
In fact we need to serve both the OFM and EAP stack, sometimes in the same
project. While we use scripting languages mostly, some patterns and lessons
learned could most certainly help in a Java EE or PaaS world, too. Some
parts like Maven are also Java based in our stack.
Werner
Am 02.07.2012 07:17 schrieb "Markus Eisele" <myfear_at_web.de>:
> Hi,
>
> > I am very supportive of better modularity/pluggability (even in
> > case of swapping/upgrading Java EE API implementations on a given Java EE
> > platform -- e.g. swapping Weld for OWB on GlassFish).
>
> Same here! That would be a very valuable place to look for
> improvements as early as possible.
> Especially with the "cloud topic" in mind this could be the switch to push.
> Imagine the issues a PaaS provider would run into:
>
> 1) swapping/upgrading RIs due to security issues
> 2) providing own/patched RIs as services
>
> I think we could come up with even more ;)
>
> There is still the jigsaw "problem".
> If I only look at the (hopefully) latest system requirements document from
> Mark
>
> http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jigsaw/doc/draft-java-module-system-requirements-12
> it's absolutely possible that every single minute spent with EE 7 will
> be worth exactly nothing.
>
> @Linda/Bill ?
>
> -M
>
>
> > On 7/2/2012 12:45 AM, Markus Eisele wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Antonio,
> >>
> >> here are my two cents:
> >> The profile idea was good. And I still support it. Even if the reason
> >> for it simply was to lower the barriers for web-container centered
> >> products to earn a Java EE certification.
> >> It would be nice to have more specialized profiles around but I don't
> >> believe a new "Servlet/Minimal profil" would be of any help with your
> >> problem.
> >> With all the core modules being present in the server classpath you
> >> end up having trouble replacing them. It ever has been like this.
> >> I have similar experiences while switching from one vendor to the
> >> other in general. Even upgrading containers for a single product is a
> >> pain most of the time.
> >>
> >> Having a minimal/lightweight whatever-you-call-it profile in place
> >> solves this but you would end up with your own DIY app-server. That's
> >> not the way I would like to see Java EE moving. This approach could
> >> even be harder in terms of migration in the future. And it sets a
> >> comparably high barrier for beginners which need to know which
> >> technologies to pick.
> >>
> >> Instead what I would love to see is, that we move forward with some
> >> thoughts regarding modularization and version number ranges for
> >> dependent technologies.
> >> All the modularization work that is done for Java 8 might be a good
> >> way to facilitate this with later EE versions.
> >> To me it doesn't seem to be a good fit investing into this before Java
> >> 8 (and so Java EE 8) and I also don't support having a new minimal
> >> profile.
> >>
> >> -M
> >>
> >>
> >> On 29 June 2012 23:34, Antonio Goncalves <antonio.goncalves_at_gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi all,
> >>>
> >>> Four years ago, when we were building Java EE 6, we had this idea of a
> >>> minimal profile that Roberto blogged about
> >>> (
> http://weblogs.java.net/blog/robc/archive/2008/02/profiles_in_the.html).
> >>> The idea was to standardise "Tomcat-like" application servers with a
> >>> minimal
> >>> profile containing Servlets and JSPs. So we would have had this
> "minimal"
> >>> profile, the web profile and the full one. We mostly voted no on this
> >>> minimal profile, and I was one of them.
> >>>
> >>> I've spent the week migrating a JSF 1.2 application running on Tomcat
> to
> >>> JBoss 6 EAP (which comes with JSF 2.0). Now I'm trying to run an
> >>> application
> >>> with JAX-RS 2.0 running on GlassFish 3.x (which comes with JAX-RS 1.1).
> >>> On
> >>> both cases, it's hell. This would be easier if I could have used a
> JBoss
> >>> 6
> >>> EAP Minimal Profile (or a GlassFish 3.x Minimal Profile) and bundle my
> >>> own
> >>> external jars like I do with Tomcat. If we want applications to migrate
> >>> to
> >>> Java EE application servers, one ease of use would be to have just a
> >>> servlet
> >>> container. And it will give a nice migration plan to application : e.g.
> >>> "migrate from Tomcat to JBoss Minimal profile, and then when you are
> used
> >>> to
> >>> your new application server, move to a Web Profile and start adding
> other
> >>> Java EE modules".
> >>>
> >>> I think having a new "Minimal Profile" (a better name would be a
> "Servlet
> >>> Profile" with just Servlets, EL and JSP) would increase modularity in
> >>> application servers and help applications to migrate to Java EE.
> >>>
> >>> What would you think of introducing a new profile in Java EE 7 ?
> >>>
> >>> Antonio
> >>
> >>
> >> -----
> >> No virus found in this message.
> >> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> >> Version: 2012.0.2171 / Virus Database: 2437/5105 - Release Date:
> 07/01/12
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>