tomee-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jonathan Fisher <jonat...@springventuregroup.com>
Subject Re: "Java Application Servers are Dead"
Date Fri, 16 May 2014 03:59:02 GMT
Part 3 has been posted:
http://blog.paralleluniverse.co/2014/05/15/modern-java-pt3

and David, after reading your mails I'm about this fired up about TomEE:
http://s27.postimg.org/xcq6wgx8j/Screen_Shot_2014_05_15_at_10_54_51_PM.png


On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 5:19 PM, David Blevins <david.blevins@gmail.com>wrote:

> On May 13, 2014, at 4:40 PM, Anthony Fryer <apfryer@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I'm interested in the "EARs and complex packaging sucks" particularly in
> > relation to JCA resource adapters,which can only be packaged in an EAR
> > according to the standards today, even though TomEE supports deploying
> it in
> > a WAR file.  Any chance of getting that to be part of the standard?  That
> > seems to be a big missing part of the collapsed EAR concept.
>
> Keen observation :)  I tried to get that into Java EE 6 when we added the
> EJBs in .WARs feature (based on Collapsed EAR success).
>
> We did that work in the EJB spec as part of EJB 3.1 rather than officially
> in EE 6.
>
> The same approach was taken on pushing for Embeddable containers, was also
> done in EJB 3.1.
>
> Getting both concepts to be EE-wide rather than just EJB-specific is what
> motivated me to join the EE expert group.  Ultimately, there wasn't enough
> confidence (at that time) to do that.  I didn't push as I was fairly
> confident that simply introducing these concepts even at a smaller scope
> was a huge step forward and effectively "cracked the nut" -- once people
> came to expect them and like them it would only be a matter of time.  Mind
> you this was 2009.  We've come pretty far since then.
>
> As is typically the case, the changes we enjoy now were seeded quite a
> while ago.
>
> We didn't take anymore steps towards more embeddability in Java EE 7, but
> we did get some work done with regards to connector.
>
> Modernizing connectors and getting people to want them and actually write
> them is in my mind a precursor to getting anyone to accept the idea that
> these could be included in a webapp.  More seeding.  The connector
> modernization made it in, but we need more connector authors out there and
> more evangelism.
>
> Odds are pretty good for Java 8 that will see more embeddability and
> perhaps more simplified packing.
>
> I seem to be alone so far, but I've come to not really enjoy the .war file
> for the reason it doesn't work on a plain jvm classpath.  It seems like we
> got it backwards.  The classes are nested and the content is at the top.
>  Were we to reverse it, we would solve a whole host of problems.
>
>
> --
> David Blevins
> http://twitter.com/dblevins
> http://www.tomitribe.com
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message