Geronimo and OpenEJB (was: [Connector] UserTransaction incomplete)

[Brian Deacon <br...@navelplace.com>]

On Mon, Apr 05, 2004 at 08:17:01PM -0700, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
> Hamilton Verissimo de Oliveira (Engenharia - SPO) wrote:
> 
> >Btw I should submit the patch to this very list? Seems to me that openejb 
> >is
> >managed by the same committers (or at least a subset of them). Why's that?
> >Protect ASF from IP issues? 
> >
> 
> Most definitely not.
> 
> Since the very beginning Geronimo has worked with other open source 
> projects to build a complete J2EE solution - OpenEJB is one of those, 
> Jetty and JOTM are others. However, at the time OpenEJB provided EJB1.1 
> functionality and quite a few people have worked to bring it up to the 
> 2.1 level - given the size of an EJB project, it's not really surprising 
> there is overlap in the communities.

This has been a question I'd hoped would get answered by my continued
lurking and website reading.  But now I'll just bust it out...

Is the long-term intent for Geronimo that the Jetty's and OpenEJB's of
the world be plug-inable to Geronimo, or are there plans to make
OpenEJB part of the core of Geronimo?  That's three in a row.  If I
could just line up the word Geronimo one more time.  Excellent.
Sorry, where was I.  :)

I've hunted, perhaps poorly, for the consensus/thoughts/design on
this.  Anywhere on the website where this is talked about?  Or maybe
some keywords to google the archive for?  Or (the lazy bastard says)
someone want to ramble on directly about it?  (Actually, pointers at
more detail would be appreciated either way, if such exists.)

Thanks!

B

Re: Geronimo and OpenEJB

[Jeremy Boynes <je...@coredevelopers.net>]

Brian Deacon wrote:

> On Mon, Apr 05, 2004 at 08:17:01PM -0700, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
> 
>>Hamilton Verissimo de Oliveira (Engenharia - SPO) wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Btw I should submit the patch to this very list? Seems to me that openejb 
>>>is
>>>managed by the same committers (or at least a subset of them). Why's that?
>>>Protect ASF from IP issues? 
>>>
>>
>>Most definitely not.
>>
>>Since the very beginning Geronimo has worked with other open source 
>>projects to build a complete J2EE solution - OpenEJB is one of those, 
>>Jetty and JOTM are others. However, at the time OpenEJB provided EJB1.1 
>>functionality and quite a few people have worked to bring it up to the 
>>2.1 level - given the size of an EJB project, it's not really surprising 
>>there is overlap in the communities.
> 
> 
> This has been a question I'd hoped would get answered by my continued
> lurking and website reading.  But now I'll just bust it out...
> 
> Is the long-term intent for Geronimo that the Jetty's and OpenEJB's of
> the world be plug-inable to Geronimo, or are there plans to make
> OpenEJB part of the core of Geronimo?  That's three in a row.  If I
> could just line up the word Geronimo one more time.  Excellent.
> Sorry, where was I.  :)
> 
> I've hunted, perhaps poorly, for the consensus/thoughts/design on
> this.  Anywhere on the website where this is talked about?  Or maybe
> some keywords to google the archive for?  Or (the lazy bastard says)
> someone want to ramble on directly about it?  (Actually, pointers at
> more detail would be appreciated either way, if such exists.)
> 

I'll ramble :)

The long-term intent is to allow most of the components outside the 
Geronimo kernel to be plugged. The obvious example is Jetty and Tomcat 
where users get to chose which configuration suits their needs better. 
Other examples are the use of JOTM as a transaction manager, or 
differing JMS implementations.

The intention is also to allow commercial vendors to plug components in 
where they see fit (for example, commercial JTA or JMS implementations) 
although of course such a configuration would not be Geronimo.

Various configurations of Apache Geronimo will be certified as J2EE 
compliant, depending on itchiness, usage, or just plain orneriness (the 
advantage of not having a marketing department).

Finally, the decision for a project to become part of the Geronimo core 
would depend on the communities involved. Given OpenEJB, Jetty, Tomcat, 
JOTM all have vibrant communities of their own, I would not expect that 
to happen soon.

-- 
Jeremy