Hi Mark,

In 2017, Hugi and I converted a large project (>800.000 lines) from EOF to 
Cayenne, within a few months. Had parallel branches for a while and then 
switched in production, never looked back. Cayenne is similar enough that most 
of the work is either boilerplate conversion or actually making use of the 
newly-gained benefits. Very few hard problems encountered, and all solved.

Let's have a talk in Frankfurt about what your EOF specifics actually are.

Maik


> Am 15.03.2019 um 15:34 schrieb Morris, Mark <mark.mor...@experian.com>:
> 
> Just to throw our 2¢ in, we have an extremely large codebase that is very 
> heavily invested in EOF, using it in several ways that dive deep into its 
> bowels. ;-) Of course, we also use the WOF part of WO, and all of Wonder.
> 
> Regards,
> Mark
> 
>> On Mar 15, 2019, at 5:51 AM, Hugi Thordarson <h...@karlmenn.is 
>> <mailto:h...@karlmenn.is>> wrote:
>> 
>> Hi all.
>> In preparation for the coming WODay in Frankfurt, I'd love it if you'd be 
>> open to having a discussion on the status and future of WO, so we can enter 
>> the coming work prepared.
>> 
>> I'd like to begin by sharing my own thoughts on the matter, based on my 
>> current stack and experience. It's a rehash of something I posted to our 
>> Slack yesterday, may sound revolutionary and will no doubt be controversial, 
>> but I think some outside-the-box thinking is required at this time. This is 
>> lengthy, sorry about that…
>> 
>> --
>> 
>> In the past few years I've been working towards minimising the use and 
>> effect of WO/Wonder on my stack, so when and if The Time comes, I and my 
>> customers have a migration path forward. Among the things I've done is move 
>> from EOF to Cayenne and from Ant to Maven (to make using 3rd party jars, 
>> including Cayenne easier), both of which have turned out to have been very 
>> happy decisions which I wholeheartedly recommend, regardless of anything 
>> else you do.
>> 
>> I love working with my WO/Cayenne stack, which is currently only "polluted" 
>> by the following frameworks:
>> 
>> -- WO:
>> * JavaFoundation (indirectly through WO, I never use foundation classes in 
>> my code unless absolutely required by WO)
>> * JavaWebObjects
>> 
>> -- Wonder (I consider Wonder "polluted" since it depends on WO/EOF)
>> * ERExtensions (only the WO stuff, not the EOF stuff)
>> • Ajax
>> • WOOgnl (indirectly for parsing Wonder-style inline templates)
>> …and of course then there's the deployment stuff (JavaMonitor,wotaskd, 
>> adaptors).
>> 
>> Given this, here's my proposal for a way forward:
>> * We abandon EOF (and, in fact, any ORM—this is not meant to be a full stack 
>> effort, initially at least)
>> * We re-implement JavaWebObjects as required (and the absolutely necessary 
>> parts of JavaFoundation, such as KVC and NSBundle) as a single framework
>> * We separate the necessary WO stuff from the EOF/D2W stuff in Wonder (as 
>> well as other totally unrelated things like mail sending frameworks, other 
>> utility frameworks and "useful applications") and include it in our 
>> re-implementation
>> * We create a fork of WOLips that knows how to live within the New Universe
>> * We rule the world
>> 
>> Ideally, what we end with is Just a Web Framework™ with IDE integration (and 
>> nothing else) that can serve as a basis for future development. While 
>> re-implementing WO may sound like a huge undertaking, I actually think it's 
>> smaller than rewriting all of my solutions that depend on it. This probably 
>> applies to more of you.
>> 
>> Now, looking at my own stack I know this proposal might sound a bit 
>> self-serving, but I'd like to hear other opinions. I believe it's a 
>> realistic way forward with (comparatively) minimal development effort. Turns 
>> out that WOF itself is the only part of the WO/Wonder stack that I really 
>> just don't want to live without.
>> 
>> This is something I'd like to do, and if anyone likes the idea and is 
>> willing to participate, I'm confident we can make this work! Doing stuff 
>> alone sucks.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> - hugi
>> _______________________________________________
>> Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
>> Webobjects-dev mailing list      (Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com)
>> Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
>> https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/mark.morris%40experian.com
>>  
>> <https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/mark.morris%40experian.com>
>> 
>> This email sent to mark.mor...@experian.com <mailto:mark.mor...@experian.com>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
> Webobjects-dev mailing list      (Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com 
> <mailto:Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com>)
> Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
> https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/maik%40selbstdenker.ag 
> <https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/maik%40selbstdenker.ag>
> 
> This email sent to m...@selbstdenker.ag <mailto:m...@selbstdenker.ag>
 _______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list      (Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

This email sent to arch...@mail-archive.com

Reply via email to