You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@geronimo.apache.org by Michael McGrady <mi...@gmail.com> on 2005/06/17 14:18:26 UTC
[OT] Spring and Geronimo
My understanding is that Geronimo is a state-of-the-art somewhat
classic J2EE framework. My understanding also is that Spring is a
somewhat different approach, moving away from Enterprise Java Beans.
If one is merely interested in JMS, is there any reason to prefer a
framework like Geronimo to Spring, given that my understanding is
correct? If my understanding is not correct, would you please
straighten me out? Thanks.
Michael McGrady
Re: [OT] Spring and Geronimo
Posted by Michael McGrady <mi...@gmail.com>.
Thanks, Dain. I am still waiting on the specs, so I am not sure. All
there responses have been very helpful.
On 6/17/05, Dain Sundstrom <da...@iq80.com> wrote:
> On Jun 17, 2005, at 6:59 AM, Jeff Genender wrote:
>
> > Michael McGrady wrote:
> >
> >> My understanding is that Geronimo is a state-of-the-art somewhat
> >> classic J2EE framework. My understanding also is that Spring is a
> >> somewhat different approach, moving away from Enterprise Java Beans.
> >> If one is merely interested in JMS, is there any reason to prefer a
> >> framework like Geronimo to Spring, given that my understanding is
> >> correct? If my understanding is not correct, would you please
> >> straighten me out? Thanks.
> >> Michael McGrady
> >>
> >
> > Michael,
> >
> > Spring is not "moving away from Enterprise Java Beans". That is a
> > huge misnomer. Spring embraces J2EE, including EJBs as it has a
> > complete API to do so. Spring is an API that is very useful and
> > helpful to developers throughout the J2EE arena and beyond. So
> > Spring can and should be used with Geronimo, definately not as a
> > replacement.
>
> To add to this.... Most spring services assume that they are running
> in a J2EE container, which provides the infrastructure services such
> as a transaction manager, JMS and servlets.
>
> Now if you are really only interested in JMS, I believe that there is
> a spring standalone setup that only does JMS using ActiveMQ. You
> should take a look at http://www.activemq.org
>
> -dain
>
Re: [OT] Spring and Geronimo
Posted by Dain Sundstrom <da...@iq80.com>.
On Jun 17, 2005, at 6:59 AM, Jeff Genender wrote:
> Michael McGrady wrote:
>
>> My understanding is that Geronimo is a state-of-the-art somewhat
>> classic J2EE framework. My understanding also is that Spring is a
>> somewhat different approach, moving away from Enterprise Java Beans.
>> If one is merely interested in JMS, is there any reason to prefer a
>> framework like Geronimo to Spring, given that my understanding is
>> correct? If my understanding is not correct, would you please
>> straighten me out? Thanks.
>> Michael McGrady
>>
>
> Michael,
>
> Spring is not "moving away from Enterprise Java Beans". That is a
> huge misnomer. Spring embraces J2EE, including EJBs as it has a
> complete API to do so. Spring is an API that is very useful and
> helpful to developers throughout the J2EE arena and beyond. So
> Spring can and should be used with Geronimo, definately not as a
> replacement.
To add to this.... Most spring services assume that they are running
in a J2EE container, which provides the infrastructure services such
as a transaction manager, JMS and servlets.
Now if you are really only interested in JMS, I believe that there is
a spring standalone setup that only does JMS using ActiveMQ. You
should take a look at http://www.activemq.org
-dain
Re: [OT] Spring and Geronimo
Posted by Jeff Genender <jg...@savoirtech.com>.
Michael McGrady wrote:
> My understanding is that Geronimo is a state-of-the-art somewhat
> classic J2EE framework. My understanding also is that Spring is a
> somewhat different approach, moving away from Enterprise Java Beans.
> If one is merely interested in JMS, is there any reason to prefer a
> framework like Geronimo to Spring, given that my understanding is
> correct? If my understanding is not correct, would you please
> straighten me out? Thanks.
>
> Michael McGrady
Michael,
Spring is not "moving away from Enterprise Java Beans". That is a huge
misnomer. Spring embraces J2EE, including EJBs as it has a complete API
to do so. Spring is an API that is very useful and helpful to
developers throughout the J2EE arena and beyond. So Spring can and
should be used with Geronimo, definately not as a replacement.
Jeff
Re: [OT] Spring and Geronimo
Posted by Jeremy Boynes <jb...@apache.org>.
Geronimo is not meant to be a monolithic "classic J2EE framework" but
rather an architecture for implementing application frameworks. The
project really comprises three things:
* a core "micro-" kernel and runtime environment that provide the
infrastructure for running services
* a set of useful system services such as transaction management
or messaging
* pre-assembled collections of those services into specific
application-level frameworks such as J2EE
We're not trying to define an application programming model such as
J2EE, Spring or others; we're building the low-level components that
those models need to run. As Sing says, these are complementary rather
than competitive - pick Spring, run it on Geronimo.
--
Jeremy
Michael McGrady wrote:
> My understanding is that Geronimo is a state-of-the-art somewhat
> classic J2EE framework. My understanding also is that Spring is a
> somewhat different approach, moving away from Enterprise Java Beans.
> If one is merely interested in JMS, is there any reason to prefer a
> framework like Geronimo to Spring, given that my understanding is
> correct? If my understanding is not correct, would you please
> straighten me out? Thanks.
>
> Michael McGrady
Re: [OT] Spring and Geronimo
Posted by Dain Sundstrom <da...@iq80.com>.
On Jun 17, 2005, at 8:31 AM, Michael McGrady wrote:
> Is Geronimo ready for prime time, like JBoss, or is that a while off?
> By the way, thanks for these helpful responses. Very much
> appreciated.
It depends on what you are doing. Geronimo is assembled mostly from
stable components with some new Geronimo code. If you are mainly
doing a web application, then Geronimo is ready to go, since the web
server we use is either Jetty or Tomcat and they have been around for
ever. On the the other hand, if you are doing web-services or corba,
you should give us a few more months.
> Also, does Geronimo like JBoss incorporate a web
> container/server like Tomcat or does Geronimo do it all?
We either use Jetty or Tomcat.
-dain
Re: [OT] Spring and Geronimo
Posted by Jeff Genender <jg...@savoirtech.com>.
Oh man...well since we are plugging...
<super_duper_shamelessplug>
Support for Geronimo will can also come from
http://www.virtuas.com/commercial/
</super_duper_shamelessplug>
:D
Jeremy Boynes wrote:
> Michael McGrady wrote:
>
>> Is Geronimo ready for prime time, like JBoss, or is that a while off?
>
> <flamebait>Unlike JBoss, yes</flamebait>
> <plug>You can even get support http://www.gluecode.com</plug>
>
>> By the way, thanks for these helpful responses. Very much
>> appreciated. Also, does Geronimo like JBoss incorporate a web
>> container/server like Tomcat or does Geronimo do it all?
>>
>
> There are both Jetty and Tomcat based implementation of the web
> container service. These use other Geronimo services such as
> transactions, security, database pooling, ...
>
> --
> Jeremy
Re: [OT] Spring and Geronimo
Posted by Michael McGrady <mi...@gmail.com>.
I am sure that Jeremy was just joking but I do appreciate this honest
and business like assessment. This gives me great confidence,
actually, in Geronimo. I will follow the guidelines suggested here.
On 6/17/05, Aaron Mulder <am...@alumni.princeton.edu> wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Jun 2005, someone wrote:
> > > Is Geronimo ready for prime time, like JBoss, or is that a while off?
> >
> > <flamebait>Unlike JBoss, yes</flamebait>
>
> WTF? Look, I definitely don't want to start that kind of
> attitude. If we're going to compete with any other app server, it has to
> be on its merits. I think a superficial examination shows this comment to
> be total bullshit. JBoss is certified, has actual releases, and supports
> major features that Geronimo doesn't. Geronimo embodies some good ideas
> and some good code, but IMHO it's nowhere near competing with any app
> server.
>
> I would like to be there. I think we're making great progress.
> But really, we have a ways to go. Let's not start with insults we're not
> prepared to back up!
>
> So I'm pretty sure the comment was pure humor, but I think it's
> all to easy to take out of context, and we'd be better off leaving the
> "hot air" to others.
>
> In any case, a pretty important fact was left out of this reply --
> namely that Geronimo has not yet reached a 1.0 release, and the most
> recent milestone release (7 months ago?) has some *serious* flaws. Our
> "unstable" releases and SVN code are pretty good, and probably even "very
> good" in areas like the web container, but still lack key functionality
> and ease of use features. I would definitely recommend that people check
> out an unstable build if they're interested, but I personally wouldn't
> recommend that anyone plan to use it for serious work yet. But back to
> the original poster, if you look at the road map thread that's been going
> on recently, you can see some of the things we think are missing, and
> consider for yourself how important those things are to you.
>
> Aaron
>
> P.S. Let's add a page to the web site listing companies providing support
> for Geronimo. It does add credibility, they deserve the publicity, and it
> would prevent needless plugs on the mailing list.
>
> > <plug>You can even get support http://www.gluecode.com</plug>
> >
> > > By the way, thanks for these helpful responses. Very much
> > > appreciated. Also, does Geronimo like JBoss incorporate a web
> > > container/server like Tomcat or does Geronimo do it all?
> > >
> >
> > There are both Jetty and Tomcat based implementation of the web
> > container service. These use other Geronimo services such as
> > transactions, security, database pooling, ...
> >
> > --
> > Jeremy
> >
>
Re: [OT] Spring and Geronimo
Posted by Aaron Mulder <am...@alumni.princeton.edu>.
On Fri, 17 Jun 2005, someone wrote:
> > Is Geronimo ready for prime time, like JBoss, or is that a while off?
>
> <flamebait>Unlike JBoss, yes</flamebait>
WTF? Look, I definitely don't want to start that kind of
attitude. If we're going to compete with any other app server, it has to
be on its merits. I think a superficial examination shows this comment to
be total bullshit. JBoss is certified, has actual releases, and supports
major features that Geronimo doesn't. Geronimo embodies some good ideas
and some good code, but IMHO it's nowhere near competing with any app
server.
I would like to be there. I think we're making great progress.
But really, we have a ways to go. Let's not start with insults we're not
prepared to back up!
So I'm pretty sure the comment was pure humor, but I think it's
all to easy to take out of context, and we'd be better off leaving the
"hot air" to others.
In any case, a pretty important fact was left out of this reply --
namely that Geronimo has not yet reached a 1.0 release, and the most
recent milestone release (7 months ago?) has some *serious* flaws. Our
"unstable" releases and SVN code are pretty good, and probably even "very
good" in areas like the web container, but still lack key functionality
and ease of use features. I would definitely recommend that people check
out an unstable build if they're interested, but I personally wouldn't
recommend that anyone plan to use it for serious work yet. But back to
the original poster, if you look at the road map thread that's been going
on recently, you can see some of the things we think are missing, and
consider for yourself how important those things are to you.
Aaron
P.S. Let's add a page to the web site listing companies providing support
for Geronimo. It does add credibility, they deserve the publicity, and it
would prevent needless plugs on the mailing list.
> <plug>You can even get support http://www.gluecode.com</plug>
>
> > By the way, thanks for these helpful responses. Very much
> > appreciated. Also, does Geronimo like JBoss incorporate a web
> > container/server like Tomcat or does Geronimo do it all?
> >
>
> There are both Jetty and Tomcat based implementation of the web
> container service. These use other Geronimo services such as
> transactions, security, database pooling, ...
>
> --
> Jeremy
>
Re: [OT] Spring and Geronimo
Posted by Jeremy Boynes <jb...@apache.org>.
Michael McGrady wrote:
> Is Geronimo ready for prime time, like JBoss, or is that a while off?
<flamebait>Unlike JBoss, yes</flamebait>
<plug>You can even get support http://www.gluecode.com</plug>
> By the way, thanks for these helpful responses. Very much
> appreciated. Also, does Geronimo like JBoss incorporate a web
> container/server like Tomcat or does Geronimo do it all?
>
There are both Jetty and Tomcat based implementation of the web
container service. These use other Geronimo services such as
transactions, security, database pooling, ...
--
Jeremy
Re: [OT] Spring and Geronimo
Posted by Michael McGrady <mi...@gmail.com>.
Is Geronimo ready for prime time, like JBoss, or is that a while off?
By the way, thanks for these helpful responses. Very much
appreciated. Also, does Geronimo like JBoss incorporate a web
container/server like Tomcat or does Geronimo do it all?
On 6/17/05, Sing Li <we...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Geronimo is a SERVER container with open doors to host
>
> any services or development frameworks.
>
> Spring is a DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK with an attitude ;)
>
> You do not have to make a choice, they are not
> mutually exclusive. In fact, they are extremely
> complementary.
>
> Today, you can already run your own Spring
> applications on Geronimo; leveraging the
> ActiveMQ JMS server implementation "inside"
> Geronimo, perhaps.
>
> In the not too distant future, you may actually
> see (part of) Geronimo running on Spring.
>
> Pick Spring! Choose Geronimo! :-D
>
> - Sing
>
>
> --- Michael McGrady <mi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > My understanding is that Geronimo is a
> > state-of-the-art somewhat
> > classic J2EE framework. My understanding also is
> > that Spring is a
> > somewhat different approach, moving away from
> > Enterprise Java Beans.
> > If one is merely interested in JMS, is there any
> > reason to prefer a
> > framework like Geronimo to Spring, given that my
> > understanding is
> > correct? If my understanding is not correct, would
> > you please
> > straighten me out? Thanks.
> >
> > Michael McGrady
> >
>
>
Re: [OT] Spring and Geronimo
Posted by Dain Sundstrom <da...@iq80.com>.
On Jun 17, 2005, at 6:23 AM, Thomas P. Fuller wrote:
> Someone correct me if I'm wrong --
>
> Michael,
>
> Geronimo has a microkernel style architecture and
> Spring is being used to wire together the core
> services.
That is true but only if you use the experimental spring assembly in
sandbox/spring-assembly. The experimental spring assembly uses the
GBean kernel found at http://www.gbean.org That kernel uses spring
to wire components together. The normal Geronimo kernel has its own
wiring framework.
-dain
Re: [OT] Spring and Geronimo
Posted by "Thomas P. Fuller" <th...@coherentlogic.com>.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong --
Michael,
Geronimo has a microkernel style architecture and
Spring is being used to wire together the core
services.
Thomas
--- Michael McGrady <mi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> My understanding is that Geronimo is a
> state-of-the-art somewhat
> classic J2EE framework. My understanding also is
> that Spring is a
> somewhat different approach, moving away from
> Enterprise Java Beans.
> If one is merely interested in JMS, is there any
> reason to prefer a
> framework like Geronimo to Spring, given that my
> understanding is
> correct? If my understanding is not correct, would
> you please
> straighten me out? Thanks.
>
> Michael McGrady
>
Re: [OT] Spring and Geronimo
Posted by Sing Li <we...@yahoo.com>.
Geronimo is a SERVER container with open doors to host
any services or development frameworks.
Spring is a DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK with an attitude ;)
You do not have to make a choice, they are not
mutually exclusive. In fact, they are extremely
complementary.
Today, you can already run your own Spring
applications on Geronimo; leveraging the
ActiveMQ JMS server implementation "inside"
Geronimo, perhaps.
In the not too distant future, you may actually
see (part of) Geronimo running on Spring.
Pick Spring! Choose Geronimo! :-D
- Sing
--- Michael McGrady <mi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> My understanding is that Geronimo is a
> state-of-the-art somewhat
> classic J2EE framework. My understanding also is
> that Spring is a
> somewhat different approach, moving away from
> Enterprise Java Beans.
> If one is merely interested in JMS, is there any
> reason to prefer a
> framework like Geronimo to Spring, given that my
> understanding is
> correct? If my understanding is not correct, would
> you please
> straighten me out? Thanks.
>
> Michael McGrady
>