Skip to main content
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [jakarta.ee-community] Why not dropping EARs in Jakarta EE?
Just something to keep in mind is that dropping support for EAR archives is a non-trivial task, as the TCK makes extensive use of ear archives. If EAR archives are made optional then there would potentially be a lot of work involved to update the TCK.

Stuart



On Sat, Apr 28, 2018 at 6:06 PM, Ralph Soika <ralph.soika@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hi,

to my background: I have been developing enterprise applications for more than 10 years, mostly as EARs. So I am mainly a User of EE and was never part of a EE working group. My opinion about EARs after years is: It's an awful disaster if you're trying to develop an ear platform independently. So why should it be called 'standard'?

Today I wonder what can be achieved with an EAR, which could not be achieved easier and clearer with a clean microservice architecture?

So I'm suggesting removing EAR support from Jakarta EE. This makes the platform easier to learn and more lightweight.

If you like, you can read the following discussion. It's about the question of how to package shared EJB libraries in one ear. And it shows how awkward it is to talk about EAR deployment questions. 
https://github.com/payara/Payara/issues/2508#issuecomment-385129757

What is your opinion about the future support of the concept of EAR?

===
Ralph



_______________________________________________
jakarta.ee-community mailing list
jakarta.ee-community@eclipse.org
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakarta.ee-community


Back to the top