[javaee-spec users] [jsr342-experts] Re: Minimal profile ?

From: Antonio Goncalves <>
Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2012 15:51:21 +0200

Like you, more and more I think JSF should not have been into the Web
Profile. But as we can see today, there are more and more applications with
NoSQL architecture without JPA/JTA. And we have more and more Web based
apps. So, really, if we want a profile that doesn't take the UI and the
persistence into account (ie. no JSF, JSP, JPA, JTA, EJB Lite)... then,
there is only Servlet, CDI and Bean Validation left.

With NoSQL applications coming strong (without JSF/JSP in mind) Java EE and
the Web Profile will be seen as bloated and Tomcat/Jetty will remain
the preferred app server for deploying "modern applications".

My 2 cents

On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 6:34 PM, Jim Knutson <> wrote:

> Antonio Goncalves <> wrote on 06/29/2012
> 04:34:31 PM:
> > 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.
> That's one of the reasons I didn't want JSF as part of the Web Profile,
> but it's
> too late now.
> I still say that a minimal profile with just the servlet container is not
> a
> platform. There's no value in defining a platform that has next to nothing
> in it. You basically can't count on anything being there and you are
> forced
> into building your own server or bundling everything in the app.
> The only reasonable chance we have to solve the integration problem has
> been
> to include modularity in the architecture. I've been saying this for
> several
> releases now and we are yet again putting it off.
> I'm not interested in a minimal profile hack.
> Thanks,
> Jim Knutson
> WebSphere Java EE Architect

Antonio Goncalves
Software architect and Java Champion
Web site <> |
LinkedIn <> | Paris
JUG<> |
Devoxx France <>