incubator-yoko-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Jencks <david_jen...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: [PROPOSAL] Next Steps
Date Thu, 06 Sep 2007 16:18:21 GMT

On Sep 6, 2007, at 8:59 AM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:

>
> On Sep 6, 2007, at 4:05 AM, Rick McGuire wrote:
>
>> Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sep 5, 2007, at 9:35 PM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sep 5, 2007, at 7:03 AM, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Other thoughts?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I think that Yoko would be better suited in Geronimo where we  
>>>> are more server oriented.  I think that given the plugable  
>>>> nature of the ORB, the CXF bindings could probably move to CXF.
>>>
>>>
>>> Actually, another idea might be OpenEJB.  I think that there  
>>> could be lots of container server overlap here.
>> I don't think OpenEJB would be a very good fit any more.  In the  
>> Geronimo 2.0 release, the CORBA EJB binding support was moved from  
>> OpenEJB into Geronimo, so OpenEJB doesn't contain any CORBA code.   
>> Geronimo, I believe, is the only option if you wish to move it  
>> closer to the servers.
>>
>
>
> While the interop code may reside in Geronimo, I still think that  
> there could be container synergies between Yoko and OpenEJB.

Could you elaborate a little bit?  Why wouldn't this apply to Yoko  
and Geronimo?

I would lean slightly towards including Yoko in Geronimo but I think  
that's mostly because I think I'd work on it more there because it  
would be in front of me more often rather than necessarily any better  
fit.  With the projects laid out as they are now it would certainly  
be inconvenient to have yoko in openejb and then used in geronimo,  
but we can fix that if there's a good reason.

thanks
david jencks

>
>
> Regards,
> Alan
>


Mime
View raw message