Jean-Pierre.Laisne@xxxxxxxx wrote:
What is JOnAS team advice ?
This message is co-signed JOnAS team and Speedo team.
BTW, what's the advice of the ObjectWeb board about this ? as it has
already been asked for ...
François
-----Alexandre Lefebvre
<alexandre.lefebvre@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: -----
To: Roland Hedayat <roland@xxxxxxxxxx>
From: Alexandre Lefebvre <alexandre.lefebvre@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 06/14/2006 04:00PM
cc: "jonas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx (jonas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx)'"
<jonas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, community@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, architecture
<architecture@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, College Objectweb
<college@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, executive-Committee
<executive-committee@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, speedo
<speedo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, board <board@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [board] Re: [college] Speedo, JOnAS and ObjectWeb
Roland,
We would like to state the point of view of the JOnAS and Speedo
projects.
However, in our opinion, the points you raise should also call for a
reaction from the ObjectWeb Board as well as the ObjectWeb College.
For sure, we agree with you that, within the ObjectWeb middleware
components library, the O-R mapping layer is a crucial element.
This layer is actually implemented by several components including
JORM and MEDOR, on top of which are provided the EJB2 CMP view (the
JOnAS CMP2 implementation) as well as the JDO view (the Speedo project).
Very soon, Speedo will also provide an EJB3 persistence API.
The EJB3 specification clearly defines a persistence API that allows
users to plug any EJB3 persistence provider (Hibernate, Speedo,
TopLink essential, ...) within an EJB3 container like EasyBeans.
The current JOnAS EJB3 implementation, EasyBeans, currently includes
Hibernate as a persistence provider.
This choice was motivated from the fact that, at the time the JOnAS
EJB3 implementation was developed, Speedo did not provide the
necessary EJB3 features.
Of course, it is important that ObjectWeb keeps mastering its
persistence layer, and providing JOnAS with ObjectWeb's persistence
solution instead of a third party one is a must.
In this line, the roadmaps of both Speedo and JOnAS are to provide
full EJB3 support with Speedo, and to integrate Speedo as the
persistence provider of EasyBeans.
Regarding the integration of Speedo in JOnAS (independently of EJB3),
we must admit that the current process has not been satisfactory, and
has not allowed to integrate the latest Speedo version in JOnAS.
As you mentioned, this mismatch between JOnAS and Speedo was not due
to technical issues, but only to some releasing process issues that
we will fix asap.
The JOnAS and Speedo teams
On 12 Jun 2006, at 11:14, Roland Hedayat wrote:
> Speedo, JOnAS and ObjectWeb
> ===========================
>
> Two weeks ago, the following text (attached below) was sent
> to the community list. It was later forwarded to the
> architecture and board of directors lists.
>
> The letter was written as a result of concern for the OW
> strategy with respect to O/R mapping in general, and the
> position of Speedo in the OW suite in particular. Our
> letter did not result in any answer from OW architects or
> strategists and this has increased our concern.
>
> For any enterprise, small or big, needless to say that the
> enterprise data is mission critical. While JOnAS and the
> other OW middleware collect, transform, distill, transmit and
> present data, the O/R component is the glue between the
> application server and the database, and thus an extremely
> important component. A middleware offering including an
> application server is not a complete one without a good O/R
> mapping component.
>
> Fortunately, there exists one with a very great potential,
> namely Speedo, in the OW offering.
>
> Unfortunately, it is our impression, as we pointed out in
> our original letter, that this component is not visibly
> attributed the importance and priority it deserves.
>
> When we chose JOnAS/Speedo as our solution for the health
> care projects in Stockholm City Council three years ago, we
> took it for granted that Speedo, then in its infancy was to
> be considered as crucial a component as the other central OW
> components such as JOnAS.
>
> We therefore ask the OW management as well as the board of
> architects the following questions:
>
> 1. Is a persistence layer with an O/R mapping solution
> considered an important component on the server side?
>
> 2. If yes, do you intend to keep control of this component,
> both for technical reasons such as for example optimization
> for usage with clustered JOnAS but also due to the
> importance of having a complete offering to potential
> users/customers?.
>
> 3. If yes, is Speedo the OW component of choice for
> O/R mapping? Do we have a commitment from OW that this
> component is going to be developed, maintained and
> promoted by OW?
>
> 4. Or is there any other OW component with equivalent
> functionality and performance that you recommend us to use
> instead? Or do you recommend us to change to Hibernate?
>
> If the latter is the case, we will have greatly increased
> difficulties in explaining to our managers why not use a Red
> Hat/JBoss/Hibernate solution altogether.
>
> We have experienced problems, as described below. It is
> our feeling, though, that this is mainly due to giving
> too low priority to Speedo and its integration and
> release synchronization with JOnAS, not to any serious
> technical problems.
>
> Being committed to using and promoting OW solutions, we urge
> the architects and board of directors not to throw away a
> true techo pearl "made by OW", and instead clearly state the
> importance of Speedo within the OW infrastructure.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Mikael Karlsson
> Creado Systems
>
> Hans Höök
> Höök Utveckling AB
>
> Roland Hedayat
> Inherit S AB
>
> =========================================================
>
> Our original letter from May 29th enclosed:
>
>
> Speedo and ObjectWeb
> ====================
>
> The signers of this letter are representing consultancies,
> currently using Speedo in health care applications together with
> Jonas as well as standalone. The areas where OW solutions have
> been applied by us are both safety and performance critical.
>
> The end customer for our solutions is primarily the Stockholm
> City Council, organizing the public health care of approximately
> 1.8 M inhabitants. Some of these solutions are even considered
> for national health care projects in Sweden.
>
> Three years ago, we were evaluating various open source
> middleware solutions for use in a pilot system to be developed by
> Stockholm City Council. For us, we had decided up front to make
> use of an Object/Relational mapping solution, and preferably a
> standard compliant one.
>
> Our candidates boiled down to JBoss/Hibernate and JOnAS/(Speedo or
> Hibernate).
>
> For several reasons, we opted for JOnAS/Speedo. One reason of
> particular weight was the fact that Speedo at the time was part
> of the OW suite (thus giving us a kind of "one stop" offering)
> and also compliant with a standard (JDO), while Hibernate was an
> independent 3rd party product, not compliant with a standard.
>
> So, the very existence of a good O/R mapping solution in the OW
> suite of solutions was among the important factors in favour of
> OW on our check list.
>
> We chose JOnAS/Speedo, and we have not regretted it.
>
> We came to be early users of Speedo, but the development team has
> been extremely helpful both with technical advice, solving
> problems, correcting bugs we found etc. The product is evolving
> towards high reliability and performance. For us it is a key
> component.
>
> However, since the early days, things have happened:
>
> * JDO did not become _the_ one and only standard for Java
persistence,
> it will coexist with EJB3.
>
> * Hibernate is now part of the JBoss offering
>
> * Hibernate is in the process of being standardized according to
EJB3
>
> Does this make Speedo a less important or interesting product for
> ObjectWeb?
>
> The reason for asking this question is that we have got the
> feeling, based on some indications, that Speedo is not considered
> a central, core part of the OW offering:
>
> - When a new release of JOnAS is out, it is seldom synchronized
> with the development of Speedo. In many cases one even has to
> build the latest Speedo distro and integrate it manually into
> JOnAS
>
> - The Speedo development pace seems to have slowed down lately,
> mabybe because of lack of resources
>
> - There is little promotion of the Speedo component on the OW
> site
>
> Our answer to the above rethorical question is NO, for the
> following reasons:
>
> 1. A good O/R mapping solution is increasingly important to
> bridge the "semantic gap" between a good server side
> architecture, based on OO principles, and the still prevailing
> relational database.
>
> 2. If one has to go elsewhere to find this solution, then the
> probability is much higher than one will find another solution
> (than the OW-based one) altogether. Why, as a newcomer, choose
> JOnAS and third party JBoss Hibernate rather than "one stop
> shopping" a JBoss/Hibernate solution?
>
> 3. It is in many situations nice to have an O/R component which
> is not bound to the EJB stuff, that is, can be used stand
> alone where appropriate.
>
> 4. JDO2 is now a mature standard, and in some respects superior
> to the EJB3 standard for persistence. The JDO2 standard will
> probably continue to live for the foreseeable future, even if
> the long term goal is to merge the two standards into one.
>
> 5. Speedo is one of the few Java persistence frameworks which will
> support _both_ JDO2 and EJB3.
>
> 6. Speedo is in itself a showcase for the high quality
> architecture and engineering so often found in OW components:
>
> - Highly modularized by means of Fractal, reusing Perseus,
> Medor, Jorm and relying on the ASM tools
>
> - High performance
>
> 7. Maintaining an own O/R solution makes it easier to optimize it
> for usage within JOnAS
>
> After having used OW solutions to our and our customers
> satisfaction, we actively promote ObjectWeb. For us, Speedo is a
> central part of this, and we hope that the ObjectWeb Consortium
> will continue to support Speedo, and also clearly promote it as a
> first order citizen in the suite of solutions. It so deserves.
>
> Mikael Karlsson
> Creado Systems
>
> Hans Höök
> Höök Utveckling AB
>
> Roland Hedayat
> Inherit S AB
>
> --
> ==================================
> | Roland Hedayat
> | Inherit S AB
> | Långsjöv. 8
> | 131 33 Nacka, Sweden
> | roland@xxxxxxxxxx
> | Tel: +46 (0)8 641 64 14
> | Mob: +46 (0)708 18 07 69
> | Fax: +46 (0)8 718 52 88
>
>
> --
> 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
-- !!! NEW E-MAIL ADDRESS !!! --
Alexandre Lefebvre, R&D Group Leader
France Telecom, Research & Development, MAPS/AMS
28 chemin du Vieux Chene - B.P. 98
38243 Meylan CEDEX - France
phone: +33 4 76 76 45 63 - fax: +33 4 76 76 45 57
email: alexandre.lefebvre@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
email: alefebvr@xxxxxxx
--
You receive this message as a subscriber of the board@xxxxxxxxxxxxx mailing list.
To unsubscribe: mailto:board-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
For general help: mailto:sympa@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=help
ObjectWeb mailing lists service home page: http://www.objectweb.org/wws
--
==================================================================
François EXERTIER ObjectWeb Consortium
mailto:Francois.Exertier@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://jonas.objectweb.org/
==================================================================
|
