Re: OS || JBOSS (WAS -> RE: [Webwork-devel] WW/JavaOne get together)
Brought to you by:
baldree,
rickardoberg
Menu
▾
▴
Re: OS || JBOSS (WAS -> RE: [Webwork-devel] WW/JavaOne get together)
|
From: Scott F. <sc...@at...> - 2002-04-04 05:46:36
|
Some stats: Webwork http://sourceforge.net/project/stats/index.php?report=3Dlast_30&group_id=3D= 14797 Opensymphony http://sourceforge.net/project/stats/index.php?report=3Dlast_30&group_id=3D= 9890 From the opensymphony web logs, we do over 4,000 requests a day, and a=20 little over 1,000 pages a day solidly for the last 3 months. <opinion> I believe that WW and OS will both benefit from stronger integration of=20 components. This will increase the benefit for all users. I fail to see how linking with JBoss will show any benefit for users of=20 WW on Weblogic or Orion? It is agreed that both projects have produces & continue to produce high=20 quality J2EE components, that run across many different application=20 servers. OS would have to be the second biggest OS java project apart=20 from jakarta. It would probably be fair to say that WW is the second=20 biggest MVC framework aside from Struts. It also seems that one place that both projects are lacking is=20 marketing. Specifically articles, and general awareness in the=20 community. The fact that people are still custom-building their own=20 caching components, and their own MVC frameworks is a testamony to this. I am unsure if I have misread Rickard's comments regarding JBoss - are=20 you looking to host WW on Jboss's website? Or simply redesign the=20 Website to take advantage of WW? If you are looking to 'integrate' it=20 with JBoss - that's great, but I am not sure that will give it more=20 exposure? Struts, and many other MVC frameworks also run on JBoss - I'm=20 not sure how 'integrating' will help. Perhaps you can discuss the=20 benefits further? I think that marketing of both WW and OS can benefit from a sample=20 application. Mike's mention of PetSoar would probably be a great start=20 (as PetStore is a highly recognisable name). There are other ways in=20 which marketing can be improved for both (Javaworld Articles, other=20 sample applications). In my view, the development of better fitting components between webwork=20 & Opensymphony would increase the use of *both* applications across all=20 application servers. I'm not sure that hosting WW on JBoss would=20 increase its use (apart from on JBoss). Lastly - I am wondering what has changed since JavaOne? The integration=20 was in the works beforehand. What has changed at JBoss that they are=20 now a component vendor? </opinion> Cheers, Scott Kjetil Paulsen wrote: > Could somebody enlighten me on how much traffic there are at the OS sit= e and how many users you have at your mailinglists? After talking to peop= le at JavaOne and elsewhere, OpenSymphony isn't actually a well-known-nam= e...=20 >=20 > I just have a hard time seeing what we would gain from a OS merger, I d= o however see that OS needs WW from the list below ;) >=20 > /kjetilhp >=20 >=20 >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Fran=E7ois Beauregard [mailto:fbe...@py...] >>Sent: 4. april 2002 05:08 >>To: web...@li... >>Subject: RE: [Webwork-devel] WW/JavaOne get together >> >> >> >>>>I think it makes more sense technically to integrate OS and WW. >>> >>>Even if technically there is no integration to be made? Or=20 >> >>what would >> >>>that imply, specifically? >> >>I have not tought about all the technical possibilities but=20 >>here are some: >>- Unified configuration file >>- Management/Monitoring console >>- Tag libraries >>- I am sure there are ways to take advantage of OSCache in a=20 >>nice manner in >>WW beside simply just using the tags >>- I am sure we can also come up with ideas related to SiteMesh >>- There is probably also oportunities with OSUser >>- Some things in OSCore can probably be migrated into WW and=20 >>then keep very >>general stuff in OSCore move other stuff out of OSCore into OSCoreEJB >>- Other great ideas that would come out of community discussions >> >>Cheers, >>___________________________ >>Fran=E7ois Beauregard, b.ing. >>Vice-pr=E9sident >>Recherche et d=E9veloppement >>Pyxis Technologies >>www.pyxis-tech.com >> >>T : (450) 681-9094, poste 102 >>F : (450) 681-5758 >>fbe...@py... >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Rickard [mailto:ri...@mi...] >>Sent: April 3, 2002 4:18 PM >>To: fbe...@py... >>Cc: web...@li... >>Subject: Re: [Webwork-devel] WW/JavaOne get together >> >> >>Fran=E7ois Beauregard wrote: >> >> >>>I think it makes more sense technically to integrate OS and WW. >> >> >>Even if technically there is no integration to be made? Or what would >>that imply, specifically? >> >> >> >>>The idea is to come up with value added components that can=20 >> >>be used in any >> >>>J2EE environment (including JBoss). >>>Mike explained in a previous post the reasoning behind the=20 >> >>Open Symphony >> >>>name. >>>Components developed in a truly open source and community=20 >> >>philosophy that >> >>>work together as a Symphony. >> >> >>Yes, that is very clear to me. >> >> >> >>>Therefore, I vote to keep the already made decision of=20 >> >>slowly integrating >>WW >> >>>into OS by first : >>>- Create a section for WW on OS's site >>>- Issue a press release annoucing the collaboration, the=20 >> >>reasonning behind >> >>>and the goals >>>- Come up with ideas to enhance using OS components and WW together >> >>(unified >> >>>configuration file, management console, overlaps, ...). May=20 >> >>be create a >> >>>subproject who would be responsible for this. >>>- Components should always be usable on their own but be=20 >> >>easily integrated >> >>>in a complete framework for J2EE. This promotes highly=20 >> >>modularized and >> >>>customizable components. >> >> >>But this has not much to do with the decision, but rather the=20 >>execution >>of the decision if made in OS's favor. >> >> >> >>>I also like Mike's idea of a showcase application using WW=20 >> >>that runs on >> >>>JBoss and use it a promotion for JBoss, WW and OS. >>>(Please don't start a discussion on joining the three) >> >> >>Hehe... >> >> >> >>>Bottom line : >>>Integrating OS and WW make sense both technically and from=20 >> >>a promotion >>point >> >>>of view. >>>Some combined promotion effort by JBoss and WW also makes sense. >> >> >>Is the technical point about configuration? Or is there more to it? >> >>/Rickard >> >>-- >>Rickard =D6berg >> >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Webwork-devel mailing list >>Web...@li... >>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/webwork-devel >> >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Webwork-devel mailing list > Web...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/webwork-devel >=20 --=20 Scott Farquhar :: sc...@at... Atlassian :: http://www.atlassian.com Supporting YOUR J2EE World |
