> From: Ajit Deshpande [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> 0. An RFC process to get input from the community about the feature set
> desirable from p5ee.
I must second Ajit's process recommendations.
This is a case where the open source community needs to play the Borg's game
of embrace and extend. There are two huge closed frameworks out there: J2EE
and .NET, and a lot of marketing and development effort has gone into them.
So why would I want to learn a third framework? Because I want to write in
perl rather than c#? As someone who has played both the CTO and developer
roles (probably made me a bad CTO--I could actually do something ;-) ), I
would be asking questions of any developer who presented this to me like:
* Why can't you just use ActiveState's perl.net
(or whatever they call it) inside of .net?
* What advantage does this give me over the various
apache/java application server initiatives?
* We've already got $$$ invested in various beans.
How will this interoperate?
Which all point me to suggesting that p5ee needs to go back to perl's roots
as "system glue" and start with
* personalization interfaces for .net and j2ee
* a clear SOAP dtd
* an introspection api
(for example)
and then apply what "perl can do better" to the middleware problem.
Walt Knowles
