river-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Patricia Shanahan <p...@acm.org>
Subject Re: Suggestion for future
Date Mon, 27 Dec 2010 16:31:57 GMT
I think this is a really valuable conversation, and I hope it can be 
brought to a conclusion we can work with. I will not be contributing 
because I don't have sufficient distributed computing background.

Patricia


Niclas Hedhman wrote:
> Gang,
> 
> There is a strong distributed tradition in the group of people here,
> yet unable to communicate the 'purpose' of River. Large companies look
> at Gigaspaces, pays good money for it and asked if liking Jini, most
> will go "Huh? Why would we use that?", mostly ignorant to the fact
> that Jini specs drove Gigaspaces into where it is.
> 
> At my company, we are doing evaluations of distributed technologies at
> the moment. Jini/River is not even on the map, because it "misses the
> points" that are our starting point. But an open source contender like
> Hazelcast is, because it delivers an 'starting point' which is easy to
> understand, i.e. a list of features as Distributed
> Map/Queue/Events/Executor/... expressed in terminology that we (the
> users) already know.
> 
> So here is my modest suggestion for the Jini community; If you are as
> hot on distributed technology as you think you are, then start
> thinking in terms (and deliver a clear message) that matters to the
> users;
...

Mime
View raw message