Mailing-List: contact geronimo-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <3F32538C.20300@mortbay.com>
Date: Thu, 07 Aug 2003 23:26:36 +1000
From: Greg Wilkins <gregw@mortbay.com>
Organization: Mort Bay Consulting
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US;
 rv:1.4) Gecko/20030704 Debian/1.4-1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Alex Blewitt <Alex.Blewitt@ioshq.com>
CC: Alan Cabrera <adc@toolazydogs.com>,
 'Christian Trutz' <chris@smilebase.org>,
  geronimo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Which EJB container? Which Web container?
References: <30A827BD-C8D2-11D7-B192-0003934D3EA4@ioshq.com>
In-Reply-To: <30A827BD-C8D2-11D7-B192-0003934D3EA4@ioshq.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


Alex Blewitt wrote:
> I also think that whilst some choice is good, too much can be 
> detrimental. What I'd like out of an EJB server is one that 'Just Works' 
> and I wouldn't be particularly bothered whether it used Tomcat/Jetty or 
> OpenEJB/OJB. Nor would I (as an admin) bother about changing it.

With respect to the web container, it is my intention to contribute
by writing abstract webcontainer and webconnector services.

I want to capture 99.999% of the common configuration and management
of the web tier in these services - so that you do not need to know
what underlying implementation will be (unless you really care).
There should be no need to have web container specific configuration
in the standard deployment.    Services such as distributed sessions,
single sign-on, and load balancing management should be able to
be written to work with any web container.

My first implementation of these will use Jetty, but a Tomcat version
I assume will follow if there is call for it.  As to what should be
the default and what get's certified... I'm way too biased to comment
on that.

cheers


-- 
Greg Wilkins<gregw@mortbay.com>             Phone/fax: +44 7092063462
Mort Bay Consulting Australia and UK.          http://www.mortbay.com