On Apr 14, 2009, at 6:34 PM, Tatu Saloranta wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 2:58 AM, Paul Sandoz <Paul.Sandoz_at_sun.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> On Apr 14, 2009, at 11:53 AM, Erdinc Yilmazel wrote:
>>
>>> Do you know any other framework that will play well in app engine
>>> environment as a replacement to JAXB?
>>>
>>
>> XMLBeans? JiBX?
>
> Most data binding frameworks will probably have issues, due to
> security limitations or missing classes. It's not so much the security
> manager policies (which I understand -- and accept as a price of
> otherwise really neat option for deployment) but rather missing
> classes, and related problems that get you.
>
+1 Well put.
Paul.
> With JibX it could be that since code generation is done as
> post-processing static step it might work better. So while I
> personally prefer on-the-fly generation, to keep build process clean &
> not require re-build when underlying lib changes, here more static
> process could help.
>
> But I also hope that Google improves things, many of the issues could
> be transient. I'm just worried about the pattern of these issues, with
> Android, now GAE, and seeming lack of concern from the provider side.
>
> Perhaps what is really needed is just bit more competition. I wish
> Amazon paid some attention to things between lowest (virtual linux)
> and middle/high (message queues, map/reduce) level of processing
> stack.
> They generally know how to make no-thrills standard-enough systems,
> without unnecessarily creating forks.
>
> -+ Tatu +-
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe_at_jersey.dev.java.net
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help_at_jersey.dev.java.net
>