Jim and Meeraj,
Congratulations! Any chance the presentation was taped?
--Kevin
Jim Marino wrote:
Hi,
We just finished the ServerSide demo and I figured I send a mail to
the list outlining how it went...
We had the slot following the opening keynote and were up against Rod
(Spring) and Patrick (OpenJPA) as the other two talks. I was
surprised to find that the ballroom was pretty full. I gave the talk
and the demo showing end-to-end federated deployment and reaction
seemed very positive. Meeraj gets the "hero" award for staying up to
an obscene hour in the morning to implement a JMS-based discovery
service as we encountered last-minute hiccups with JXTA.
My observations are:
- After speaking with people after the presentation, feedback on the
value of SCA was consistent. Specifically, they thought the
programming model was nice but not a differentiator. What people got
excited about was being able to dynamically provision services to
remote nodes and have a representation of their service network. In
this respect, I think the demo worked well. Two people said they need
what the demo showed for projects they currently have underway.
- People asked how SCA is different than Spring. They reacted
positively when I said "federation" and "distributed wiring". Related
to this, people get dependency injection (i.e. it's old-hat) and just
seem to assume that is the way local components obtain references.
- People seemed to react positively when I compared SCA to Microsoft WCF
- People liked the idea of heterogeneous service networks and support
for components written in different languages, particularly C++.
- People didn't ask about web services. People were nodding their
heads (in agreement) when I talked about having the runtime select
alternative bindings such as AMQP and JMS.
- People want modularity and choice. Two areas they wanted choice in
was databinding and persistence. They liked the fact that we are not
locked into one databinding solution and that we have JPA
integration. (as an aside, they also liked that SDO can be used
without SCA). Spring integration was also popular.
- People also liked the idea of a 2MB kernel download. One person
mentioned they only want to download what they intend to use and not
a lot of extra "clutter".
- People wanted to know how SCA is different than an ESB. I basically
described it using the switch vs. router metaphor and how a component
implementation type can be a proxy for an ESB. Related to this and
point-to-point wires, people thought wire optimization by the
Controller was cool.
- People seemed to be more interested in running Tuscany as a
standalone edge server or embedded in an OSGi container. I didn't get
any questions about running Tuscany in a Servlet container or J2EE
application server. This seems to be consistent with there being a
number of talks on server-side OSGi.
My big takeway is that we need to make the demo a reality.
Jim
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
