You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to general@jakarta.apache.org by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org> on 2002/02/01 07:21:23 UTC

RE: [Fwd: cvs commit: jakarta-site2/xdocs index.xml]

That's awesome, I'll check that out!

On Thu, 2002-01-31 at 13:11, Scott Sanders wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Andrew C. Oliver [mailto:acoliver@apache.org] 
> > Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2002 5:58 PM
> > To: general@jakarta.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: [Fwd: cvs commit: jakarta-site2/xdocs index.xml]
> > 
> > 
> > On Wed, 2002-01-30 at 19:54, Jon Scott Stevens wrote:
> > > on 2002.1.30 4:15 PM, "Andrew C. Oliver" 
> > <ac...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > My only issue and I guess this is directed more at you Jon, is it 
> > > > doesn't give me a clear idea about "what we want".  Can 
> > you give me 
> > > > a good idea and I'll be glad to submit a patch to that 
> > effect.  It 
> > > > just seems like we should be asking for something and being 
> > > > specific.
> > > > 
> > > > -Andy
> > > 
> > > That is a very good point. However, privately, Sun knows 
> > exactly what 
> > > we want.
> > > 
> > > There is still some stuff that goes on behind the scenes 
> > around here 
> > > that unfortunately isn't exposed. Needless to say, 
> > discussions about 
> > > opening some of that up (including posting what we want to 
> > the public 
> > > site) are going on now.
> > > 
> > 
> > For starters:
> > I think the J2EE stuff should be under at least the same 
> > license as the rest of the JDK.
> > 
> > Personally I'm having a hard time getting particularly in 
> > uproar as I think the central core of J2EE - Enterprise Java 
> > Beans is such a poor standard, that I'm not particularly 
> > upset that its not *free*.  I should not say these things 
> > publicly, as I still have to work in these things, but in 
> > truth EJB and particularly Entity beans is a less that 
> > elegant kludge.  
> > 
> > In truth J2EE is kind of a scam.  It claims to be aiming for 
> > compatibility and universality but the truth is the vendors 
> > play too big of a role in it.  They want to have lots of room 
> > for proprietary extensions.  Its market one thing but 
> > actually sell another.
> > 
> > I'd rather see someone come up with an opensource standard 
> > that achieves the goals of EJBs without being limited by its 
> > faulty design and backward compatibility with its original 
> > faultier design.  Just my humble opinion on that.
> 
> Check out AJB in Avalon.
> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=avalon-apps-dev&m=101158982807771&w=2
> 
> Uses AltRMI from the Commons to achieve RMI with extending Remote or
> throwing remote exception.  Now you can publish any class/interface
> remotely...
> 
> Cheers,
> Scott
> 
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> 
-- 
www.superlinksoftware.com
www.sourceforge.net/projects/poi - port of Excel format to java
http://developer.java.sun.com/developer/bugParade/bugs/4487555.html 
			- fix java generics!


The avalanche has already started. It is too late for the pebbles to
vote.
-Ambassador Kosh


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>