Yeah, I'm still here :) Just to set a context: we are migrating an existing app (struts / hibernate) to a new version and new architecture (gwt / ejb3). We are migrating to GF v3. There were a few reasons... * The first idea of using Tomcat / OpenEJB / OpenJPA was to not change much what users were used to: download, deploy the war, and done. However, users would still have to install openejb, setup the data sources and so on. So that "feeling" that things would still be just touching a .properties file to set up the database and he's done was not true. This is not OpenEJB's fault, but from the EJB itself. * There are a few months before our product is finished, but we look forward. We will use EJB 3.1 (singleton / asynchronous) / JPA 2 (element collection / criteria queries / 2nd level cache) features, and the longer it takes for us to migrate, worst. The main reason for GF v3 is to have those features right now. * Combining both previous items: EJB 3.1 spec allows what first motivated using OpenEJB: packing everything in a war. * Finally: the boss liked what he read about GF, so... ;)
I really liked the OpenEJB project, and enjoyed working with it. I'm sorry I don't have time right now to contribute more, but I'll be keeping an eye on it! Luis Fernando Planella Gonzalez > On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 2:44 PM, Luis Fernando Planella Gonzalez > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > As a project decision, we are switching from the current development > > with Tomcat / OpenEJB / OpenJPA to Glassfish in our app. > > So, I'm sorry to say I won't have time (as I hadn't have since > > january, anyway) to keep working on the @Asynchronous subject. > > Hi, > > Hoping Luis will be reading it before he moves to the greener pastures... > > Would you let us know what influenced the decision? > Tomcat/OpenEJB/OpenJPA may look complicated at first, but GlassFish is > a software/module stack too, likely with tighter integration and more > testing performed. Was it GFv2 or v3? > > Jacek > >
