Tim Hyde wrote:
> Andrus,
>
> I'm 100% behind the idea of the complete platform, but I'm worried that your
> proposal talks about 'Web Applications'.
>
> I believe that what's needed is an alternative to the very idea that J2EE
> (or even J2SE) is *the* definitive collection of java libraries, and that
> the project should offering a number of sensible alternatives for use in any
> architecture.
We still will depend on certain commercial JVM's (Sun or IBM), right?
> Database access, Logging, and Development Process are three things that
> you've specifically mentioned that aren't particularly Web or Server
> oriented.
>
> Web Applications, or Server Applications, are more part of today's 'fashion'
> than inherent categories of how you make a computing solution, and we can
> expect things to move on during the lifetime of Java. Well, we can hope,
> anyway. :-)
You are right. I was mentioning Web applications just cause I wanted to
limit initial scope to something sane. And I guess because I am myself
is a better expert in this area then in any other. This would've helped
to concentrate on a certain solution-based approach from the beginning.
But I agree we can widen the scope as long as we can outline the
problems being solved.
>
> So, if possible, why not talk about a 'development and deployment platform
> for Java applications' - and then start off by assembling both the
> underlying 'component' toolsets and a number of combination-examples, such
> as the jGuru one Ted mentioned, and whatever else might emerge during the
> project as perhaps 'miniature live examples'.
+1, like I said above, I am for it if we define use cases we are going
after.
> Naturally, server applications are the primary interest point initially, but
> it would be nice to think that the collection of tools being provided for
> distribution would be offered as having wide applicability.
>
> In particular, I believe that if a thing like this is available *and gets
> marketed* (in the Red Hat sense) properly, we could start to see the
> weakening of the Dilbert idea that only vendor-supplied products are
> 'serious' tools.
>
> This *marketing* focus is the very thing I had settled on as being the
> logical conclusion of the recent threads (J2EE considered harmful, EJB=Bad,
> etc). A way to bring the marketplace to see that there are better
> alternatives than the Dark Lords. Hence the marketing side (meaning actual
> activity to spread the word and work in PR mode with the media) needs to be
> a vital part of this project, needing volunteers of a different sort than
> technicians.
>
> But assembling the distribution first is very important, and I'm with you on
> this.
yes, this should be the starting point
>
> One small extra: if a RedHat style toolkit distribution were available, the
> number of independent consultants who could offer their support services
> would exceed the number available to BEA, for example, eliminating that
> argument that 'I buy where I can depend on getting support'. Well, we can
> dream, anyway.
+1. I am an independent consultant myself, and I would stick with a
technology that
- allows me to concentrate on customer requirements rather then
repetitive coding tasks,
- offers strong design direction,
- implemented most of the standard tasks already.
The only thing that would prevent me from using such technology is that
customer's CIO has never read about it in JDJ.
>
> I had been considering a project along these lines, and had thought of the
> name 'Tonic', both because it might revive a sickening architecture and
> because the Tonic (in musical terms) is where you want to go after the
> Dominant :-)
>
> But, if OED is the same thing, yes, what's in a name ? But, think marketing
> eventually !!
I like the name Tonic, but I think Open Enterprise Distribution may
actually serve that same marketing goal better. It does sound ..umm..
serious or something :-)
.
--
~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
- Andrei (a.k.a. Andrus) Adamchik
http://objectstyle.org
list email: andrus-jk at objectstyle dot org
personal email: andrus at objectstyle dot org
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
