> From: Peter Royal [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > On Wednesday, November 20, 2002, at 06:03 AM, Berin Loritsch wrote: > > Multiple containers are not only helpful, but they are absolutely > > necessary. > > We will never be able to converge on the most generic and useable > > container > > specifications when there is only one to choose from. > Using different > > approaches that all work with the same components helps us > to determine > > important criteria such as: > > I think a single container is a goal we should strive towards. Users > don't want to have to pick a container due to separate but > overlapping > feature sets. We should strive towards a single container that is > pluggable to the point of satisfying many needs. I think the current > experimentations with multiple containers lets us push things into > different directions to see what we may want from that ubercontainer.
I still disagree rather strongly with you. Take a look at J2EE. Sun wrote the specs and the compliance testing framework. They even have a reference implementation--which I may add they do not recommend for prime-time. The real J2EE systems are written by third parties like JBoss, BEA, IBM, etc. I don't see how having one super-container is going to help. I doubt we would be able to come to one vision. The fact that consumers have to choose between systems with largely overlapping functionality in J2EE systems proves that consumers are intelligent enough to find out what their needs are. What we need to do is provide enough information to help the consumer make their decision. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
