Austin: I don't think I can properly understand your syntax. I'll try to interpret it as best I can.
You seem to imply that, just because there's an open implementation, the EJB spec is open. That is simply not true. In fact, the JBoss team cannot certify their product as "J2EE compliant", since it costs a lot of money. Lutris cannot open-source their Enhydra server, because Sun won't let them. http://www.theserverside.com/home/thread.jsp?thread_id=9177 http://www.theserverside.com/home/thread.jsp?thread_id=9037 It would seem that there are open implementations in spite of Sun. As to the process by which the spec is defined, it is restricted to the people invited by Sun: http://jcp.org/procedures/overview/index.en.jsp More specifically, you must sign a Non-disclosure agreement once you join. It is therefore a very closed process. As a last point, the implementation of EJBs seems very messy to me. You must code several classes and config files just to have a "hello world" business object, where an interface and a class would suffice. For an open alternative to EJBs, see: http://eob.sourceforge.net/ Un saludo, Alex. > -----Mensaje original----- > De: Austin Gonyou [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Enviado el: jueves 21 de febrero de 2002 21:06 > Para: Jakarta General List > Asunto: RE: EJB = bad = MS.net > > > So what does that me JBoss is? > > On Thu, 2002-02-21 at 08:19, Fernandez Martinez, Alejandro wrote: > > I personally think that a distributed remote system has > great promise. > > > > I feel that the EJB implementation is messy, closed and propietary. > > > > Un saludo, > > > > Alex. > > > > > -----Mensaje original----- > > > De: Pete Chown [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Enviado el: jueves 21 de febrero de 2002 14:09 > > > Para: Jakarta General List > > > Asunto: Re: EJB = bad = MS.net > > > > > > > > > Vic Cekvenich wrote: > > > > > > > Doing EJBs is bad on many levels and creates more problems. > > > > > > Do you feel that the idea of an EJB-like system is bad, > or just that > > > EJBs specifically were badly designed? I would be > interested to hear > > > your thoughts on a better alternative. > > > > > > I feel that web programming is currently not using > programmers' time > > > very efficiently -- you have to write a lot of repetitive, routine > > > code. It would be nice to find a more powerful way of > expressing the > > > logic of a website, so making the process less tedious (and saving > > > money). > > > > > > -- > > > Pete > > > > > > > > > -- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > > > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: > > > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > -- > Austin Gonyou > Systems Architect, CCNA > Coremetrics, Inc. > Phone: 512-698-7250 > email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > "It is the part of a good shepherd to shear his flock, not to > skin it." > Latin Proverb > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For additional commands, e-mail: > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >
