Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [] Why not dropping EARs in Jakarta EE?

Hi Ralph

my view is that ears as of today have not much use cases. Obviously packaging multiple wars into one deployment is one of them, but I never used it since years.
So every feature that can be ommitted may be a good feature because it helps making the platform simpler. When I think on different classloader handling by different application servers I even tend to say it would a good idea to prune them from the future standard.

My few cents,

Am Sa., 28. Apr. 2018 um 10:07 Uhr schrieb Ralph Soika <ralph.soika@xxxxxxxxx>:


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.

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


_______________________________________________ mailing list
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit

Anatole Tresch
PPMC Member Apache Tamaya
JCP Star Spec Lead
Switzerland, Europe Zurich, GMT+1
Twitter:  @atsticks, @tamayaconf

Speaking at:

  JSD_Speaker_2017J-Con 2017 logoJVM Con

Back to the top