marc fleury wrote:
>
> let me chime in...
>
> I predict the doom of EJB.
>
> yes.
>
> (Ok, past the boom effect). I was following a discussion on "why EJB" on
> javalobby. Whereas the discussions mostly sucked, I found a interesting
> common thread to most people. The feeling that 2 tier solutions (jsp+jdbc)
> is "good enough" for most problems. Me? I agree.
Makes sense. If you do not need some layer/tier/middleware, using it
will only slow down the code. And in many cases jsp+jdbc is all that
is needed.
But there are still situations where EJB is needed (or usefull).
> I look at the "spec requirement" from SUN and the big emphasis on on the
> wire portability is "IN MY MIND" a lower priority than making the j2ee
> stacks pervasive in tools. I believe the future of j2ee will be in
> integrated stacks (such as jsp/tomcat + jboss for database automated
> persistence). EJB2.0 is a step in the right direction (good intentions) but
> still WAY to complex for the average users. I feel the step being
> negociated is going the "corba" complexity way as opposed to the "VB
> simplicity" way. you know my feelings on "ease of use" in this new world.
Ease of use is important for the acceptance of EJB.
In particular, this is IMHO why jBoss is so successful.
But I do not think that adding IIOP would make any difference
here. It should be hidden from the normal user just like the
tranaction manager implementation.
> If the j2ee stacks are integrated then the "distribution" aspect of it is
> almost secondary, in fact it is OUT of the picture, completely since you
> exist under stacks that take the distribution.
Yes. But only if all EJB calls come from within the local VM.
> This is where the HTTP stuff
> comes in, the fact is that I trust more my apache server to thread request
> on the web and then present a "application" interface that is clean
> (html/XML ;-) than "distributed applications" talking RMI/IIOP on
> distributed container. Yes these applications exist, at least in theory,
> but it smells like "Corba spirit" to me, i.e. they dream and and they dream
> and ... they dream....
I don't follow.
Do you really think that RMI/IIOP interfaces are not clean?
Why do you think that "Corba spirit" is dreaming?
(I'm not trying to start a flamewar, just interested in your opinion.)
> in short this is not a rant about RMI/IIOP, it is more a belief that web
> application in their first primitive incarnation are going to exist in
> 3-tier with EJB, with an EJB container EMBEDDED (like what we do with
> Tomcat/Resin) than standalone replacement of Corba stuff.
I think you are right here.
But web applications are not the only place where EJB is useful.
> It is a matter of
> priority perhaps?
I guess so.
Until someone needs IIOP bad enough to add it to jBoss, it will
not be done.
Thats IMHO the way it should be.
Best Regards,
Ole Husgaard.
