I think this has become a bit confused. I think he was trying to advocate build everything, i.e. don't buy/use an EJB container. You seem to be advocating buy/use something and build the rest. I'm saying the new IT seems to be getting interested in "integration" where they buy virtually everything, fire the developers and hire/retain admins/configurators. This means from the perspective of the developer, there is no end to the IT recession. Could sort of call it the "reuse backfired syndrome" if you want.
>From: Dmitri Colebatch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: Dmitri Colebatch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: the truth about entity beans >Date: Sun, 13 Oct 2002 10:27:22 +1000 > >Hey I'm more than happy to develop... in fact thats what I enjoy doing most >(what do you think I'm doing right now). But there's no point me >developing >something, and you developing the same thing, and us both facing the same >problems. Why dont we get together, and write it together, that way we >both >benefit. Now, suppose that we start to do this, but we first do the right >thing and stfw and find that someone has beaten us to it... lets use their >code, oh, we find a bug in it, well, lets fix it, and hey presto - everyone >wins... yes? > >I'll also note at this point, that I'm no doubt pretty young in terms of >experience across different systems, with basically all my experience in >java, and I'm happy to admit that I'm no doubt naive in some areas... but >hey - if I dont express my thoughts, no one will correct them (or provide >another viewpoint).... > >cheers >dim > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "John Harby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2002 10:23 AM >Subject: Re: the truth about entity beans > > > > But the sad thing is that the new IT seems to want no development (or as > > little as possible). These frameworks you are mentioning whether > > purchased or not are used by teams to develop apps. The new IT would > > rather just buy something such as Siebel. > > > > > > >From: "Dmitri Colebatch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >To: "John Harby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >Subject: Re: the truth about entity beans > > >Date: Sun, 13 Oct 2002 09:59:48 +1000 > > > > > >I dont believe I mentioned buying anything... my argument in that >email > > >was > > >that you shouldn't be re-inventing the wheel, or inventing a wheel that > > >others also need. There are many useful open source frameworks out >there > > >that are valid alternatives to ejb... in terms of persistence and O/R > > >mapping, castor comes to mind. > > > > > >----- Original Message ----- > > >From: "John Harby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2002 8:50 AM > > >Subject: Re: the truth about entity beans > > > > > > > > > > Yeah, as some of my views of late integration has become the IT >mantra. > > > > Even the EJB container is not enough buy for IT. More and more are > > >wanting > > > > to buy and not build. Providers such as Siebel are actually offering > > >entire > > > > e-commerce sites "out of the box" (although I would expect a good >deal > > >of > > > > effort to get these working ;)). Here is one site that is doing this > > > > already: http://www.tidalwire.com/default.htm > > > > > > > > > > > > >From: Dmitri Colebatch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > >Reply-To: Dmitri Colebatch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > >Subject: Re: the truth about entity beans > > > > >Date: Sun, 13 Oct 2002 08:21:00 +1000 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > transaction management, etc. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You have to be more specific. JDBC does > > > > > > > > transactions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > yes, but it does not do transaction management. > > > > > > > > > > > > That still doesn't explain it. Doing searches on the web seems >to > > > > > > suggest that there most references seem to think that there is > > >little > > >or > > > > > > no difference. > > > > > > > > > > > > So perhaps you could provide an example or a reference that >explains > > >the > > > > > > difference? > > > > > > > > > >The real difference (in my view) is the transparent (from a coding >pov) > > > > >support of XA. To be honest, I'm not sure what is meant by > > >"transaction > > > > >management" in this context. But here's my understanding of the > > >advantages > > > > >of ejb tx model: > > > > > - XA support (can send JMS message and update db, or two dbs, in >the > > >one > > > > >tx) > > > > > - transaction demarkation (can have some methods that must >execute > > >in > > > > >their own tx, and some that must create new tx, and some that never >use > > >a > > > > >tx... and so on) > > > > >both these features come without writing code. > > > > > > > > > > > I do not understand your point. I was trying to point out that > > > > > > understanding how to configure the container so it uses those > > >wonderful > > > > > > features takes time. And is sometimes impossible. The >alternative > > >is > > > > > > writing code to do some or all of the same thing. Presumably if > > >someone > > > > > > writes the code then they do understand how to use it. >Naturally > > >one > > > > > > alternative is to hire and expert from the container vendor and >have > > > > > > them configure it correctly. But whether one figures it out > > >themself > > >or > > > > > > hires an expert it still costs. And that step must be factored >into > > >the > > > > > > calculation of the overall cost of the two alternatives. > > > > > > > > > >Ahh yes... and here's the real cruncher. OK, I'm more than happy >for > > > > >someone to say "framework X is more appropriate for my requirements > > >than > > > > >EJB", but saying "thats too hard to set up, and its cheaper to roll >my > > >own" > > > > >is hard to see being entirely accurate. Writing your own framework >(or > > > > >worse still not using a framework) means you will have more lines >of > > >code > > > > >to > > > > >maintain, and hence more bugs to fix. Sure, EJB containers have >bugs, > > >but > > > > >at least its not your responsibility to fix them. > > > > > > > > > >We are still yet to see a suggestion for an alternative framework >in > > >this > > > > >thread. > > > > > > > > > >my 2c > > > > > > > > > >cheers > > > > >dim > > > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: >http://messenger.msn.com > > > > > > > > > > > >=========================================================================== > > > > To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in >the > > >body > > > > of the message "signoff EJB-INTEREST". For general help, send email >to > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help". > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com > > > > >=========================================================================== > > To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the >body > > of the message "signoff EJB-INTEREST". For general help, send email to > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help". > > > >=========================================================================== >To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body >of the message "signoff EJB-INTEREST". For general help, send email to >[EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help". _________________________________________________________________ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com =========================================================================== To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "signoff EJB-INTEREST". For general help, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
