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

From: Reza Rahman <>
Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2012 01:00:30 -0400

This is a good synopsis of the underlying issues. I am not supportive of
the minimal profile for reasons discussed in great detail during the
Java EE 6 time-frame. 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).

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 <> 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
>> (
>> 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 -
> Version: 2012.0.2171 / Virus Database: 2437/5105 - Release Date: 07/01/12