geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From James Strachan <james_strac...@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject Re: Servlet and JSP engine
Date Wed, 20 Aug 2003 07:52:58 GMT

On Wednesday, August 20, 2003, at 08:31  am, Vikram Goyal wrote:

> Hi Greg and others,
>
> My understanding is that the initial idea of Geronimo was to develop a 
> world
> class J2EE compatible container, separate from the exisitng Apache 
> projects,
> with two main goals:
>   a.. integration of various existing and new code bases into a J2EE 
> stack,
> with those codebases existing both inside and outside of the project
>   b.. certification of the J2EE stack
> An easy interpretation of these goals (specifically the first one) is 
> that
> if an existing technology supports the components of the stack then it
> should be integrated without having to develop is from scratch. This 
> leads
> me to believe that the sole aim of this project is to bring together
> technologies rather than provide implementations, which I believe 
> should
> really have been the aim.

Not quite. There is plenty of software we can reuse to make the J2EE 
stack - however there's still lots of new stuff we need to do and lots 
of integration code required.


> A <b>complete</b> J2EE certified server and a fully modular J2EE stack 
> would
> be incomplete without an implementation of the servlet engine.

Sure.

> Even if an
> existing servlet engine can be plugged in behind the scenes it is 
> breaking
> the notion of a complete J2EE certified server.

Why? Why can't a J2EE server be modular and support pluggable service 
providers. There are various Servlet container implementations to 
choose from, various JMS providers etc.


> If the end user can take the
> servlet engine out (presumably, after all the servlet engine is 
> modular and
> pluggable), the J2EE certified server is NOT a J2EE server.

I don't follow your logic. Being modular is good. Being able to just 
use a servlet container outside of Geroniom if thats what you want is a 
good thing. However Geronimo will always have a servlet container 
inside it, unless a user really wants to disable it in their specific 
deployment configuration.

Services drop into Geronimo, so a user could create a Geornimo 
distribution which only includes web services + JTA + JMS. However the 
certified distribution of Geronimo will have the entire J2EE stack.


> I am not sure
> what you would call it, a Web services engine?, an EJB container?

J2EE server?

> Besides, there are several complexities with the plugging in other 
> servlet
> containers. I am not sure how many of you have ever tried to integrate
> Tomcat with Apache or tried to embed Tomcat as part of an application.

The folks around here are well aware of Tomcat & Jetty and integrating 
them into JBoss


> The
> embedding makes the control pass on to another applications space, in 
> which
> we have no control or say. Ideally that should be the case, after all 
> that
> is what OO is all about. However, an integrated engine, developed 
> within the
> confines of the complete J2EE engine has a better likelihood of being
> robust, modular and performing better.

Thats pretty much what we're doing. Its just we don't need to write a 
servlet engine from scratch - we can just reuse the existing ones. 
There's plenty of other stuff for us to do :)

James
-------
http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/


Mime
View raw message