ObjectWeb Consortium
Search ObjectWeb Mail Archive: 

Advanced Search - Powered by Google


Mail Archive Home | architecture List | April 2006 Index

<--  Date Index  --> <--  Thread Index  -->

Re: [college] RE: [architecture] Re: Two JBI implementations in ObjectWeb - open discussion


Hi all

After listening to the people opinions and position of ObjectWeb college and board, we have decided not to continue our efforts to implement a JBI container and to focus our activity in the JBI/ESB monitoring space thanks to portal advanced functionalities to leverage both our Portal and JBI expertise.

We will now develop only portlets in our exo-esb/ module in exo SVN source code and will leverage existing JBI containers as well as ESB. We will test those on several implementations like Petals and ServiceMix. We will continue the development of those portlet based on our current JBI container implementation until we have reached the limit of it from a monitoring perspective. We will then move to another implementation hoping that at that time Petals will be ready.

Kind regards

Benjamin Mestrallet


On Apr 12, 2006, at 4:50 PM, Gaël Blondelle - EBM WebSourcing wrote:

Hi all,

That's our turn to tell you the Petals history, status and proposal for
synergies.

1) A little bit of history and facts,

Petals was submitted jointly by FossilEC and EBM WebSourcing in the
framework of the ESBi on July 2005 with the following objectives:
        - build a distributed JBI container
        - leverage ObjectWeb architecture (Fractal) and projects

During the summer, we, at EBM WebSourcing, uploaded the first Petals code base (namely petals-0.2 on the forge) which implements a distributed NMR (the messaging part in JBI), the component LifeCycle, but lacks Component installation and deployment and was not based on Fractal component model. When Rafael from FossilEC started effectively to work on the project, he
started working on these holes in the implementation but he decided to
recode from scratch, while moving from our simple ant building system to
maven 1, and to put all our code in a frozen part of the repository.

During the last months of 2005, at the time when Rafael started to work on the project, we were incited by OW instances to study some synergies with other JBI providers. Unfortunately, these discussions failed, and during this time, we made the error of not making our dev advance a lot. But since January, we have several full time developers working on Petals (raising up to 5 people this month), and this kind of "stop and wait" situation will not
occur anymore.

Since late January, Rafael informed us that he had to leave the project
without proposing any way of collaboration at this time.

2) The status

Petals is alive, and the Petals community becomes larger.
Since January, as leader of the project, we work hard on the code base to produce a significant milestone that will go out next week. Project roadmap
until the end of the year will go online at the same time.
People from Jones project have selected Petals as the focal point for their contributions in term of architecture and packaging (downloadable packages
including the Binding Components and Service Engines produces by the
project) and use cases.

3) Synergy opportunities

We welcome any contributions, and especially from people who already know
JBI and want to work on it.
Those contributions must respect some elements:
        - Petals architecture is Fractal, and this fractalization is going
deeper in the code, according to the ObjectWeb architecture model, period.
        - Petals licence is LGPL as recommanded by ObjectWeb.
        - Petals is moving to Maven 2 as other OW projects did, but it has
to be done in continuity with the current code base.
        - Petals project must provide standard based, monitoring and
management tools, and that's certainly the point in which eXo contribution
can be the greatest.

Best regards,
Gaël Blondelle.

-----Message d'origine-----
De : Benjamin Mestrallet [mailto:benjamin.mestrallet@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Envoyé : lundi 10 avril 2006 18:03
À : Francois Letellier
Cc : architecture@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; esb@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; jean-
pierre.laisne@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; College Objectweb
Objet : [architecture] Re: Two JBI implementations in ObjectWeb - open
discussion

Hi

So let me summarize the current status and the suggestion I would
have to find synergies between the JBI.

eXo Platform has grown from a portal framework to an Application
Platform Suite (APS) including Enterprise Portal Solution (EPS) and
Enterprise Content Management (ECM) one. In each case implementing
the default JCR standards (JSR 168, 170), each time with quite some
success.

In both cases we mainly focus on the integration of all those
products to build a comprehensive stack but also allowing them to run
independently. We mainly focus on providing portlet monitoring tools
thanks to a native integration of the - in JVM - eXo service/
component stack.

We are also adding some layers of the APS by integration with other
OW projects like SpagoBI (for portal monitoring and then BAM) and
XWiki. Tools like Lomboz are also now natively supporting eXo
portlets deployment which strengthen the ObjectWeb ecosystem.

In january 2006, eXo decided to complete that stack by providing a
JBI container based on our eXo in JVM component stack to dynamically
monitor (and manage) JBI components in our JMX portlet, to leverage
the existing services like caching or security one and to finally use
the advanced building mechanism we built on top of Maven2.

Therefore, we purchased the Brazilian company FossilEC which was, at
that time, the only contributor - in term of code - to PETALS
project. Our goal was to accelerate the implementation of a JBI
container in ObjectWeb to avoid to see other OW projects and members
forced to use JBI implementations like ServiceMix. We also convinced
some partners to at least test their JBI components on our
implementation too.

Last Thursday, we have released our first JBI implementation (wrongly
marketed as an ESB in the announcement...sorry for that) which
created some FUD and noise here and there and mainly in the college
mailing list. It is not the first time there exist 2 projects with
some overlaps in OW, it is the case with Bonita and Shark as well as
Byline and eXo that were even accepted at the same time!

Now while the code contributed to PETALS were mainly FossilEC one,
the other contributor just got resources to accelerate its
contribution and tries to fill the missing holes that we would also
need.

So here is my suggestion to try to find new synergies:

- eXo backport its enhancements to PETALS code which means that the
exo-platform in JVM service container is used as the basis for the
new JBI works (note that the code of the core platform of eXo is
licensed as LGP which would not break the current licensing of petals).
- eXo replaces FossilEC as co lead of PETALS with Rafael Marins as
project admin
- eXo will provide its APS-EAI layer based on PETALS and code like
monitoring/managing portlets will remain in eXo SVN
- eXo continues to push OW members/projects to use in priority or at
least test on the OW JBI container

We would like this issue to be resolved quickly as I have not asked
my team to stop the developments during what we can call a
"negotiation" :), hence the more we wait the more the merge will be
complex.

Hope you will all find that proposal reasonable

Cheers

Benjamin Mestrallet





--
You receive this message as a subscriber of the college@xxxxxxxxxxxxx mailing list.
To unsubscribe: mailto:college-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
For general help: mailto:sympa@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=help
ObjectWeb mailing lists service home page: http://www.objectweb.org/ wws




<--  Date Index  --> <--  Thread Index  -->

Reply via email to:

Powered by MHonArc.

Copyright © 1999-2005, ObjectWeb Consortium | contact | webmaster.