Re: [jakarta.ee-community] About Profiles

[Mark Little <mlittle@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Dominik, you may feel that my examples are not valid but that doesn't
mean they are actually invalid :) The discussions around profiles date
back many years in the JCP and unfortunately I'm not able to check at
the moment as to whether those were public. But suffice it to say we
(Red Hat), IBM, Oracle and many others here, including users, provided
examples of why profiles were a good thing and necessary based on many
many years of real world use cases and thousands of customers asking
for precisely that sort of thing. As I said earlier though, you are
not alone in only wanting to have the full profile and that's fine
too. Maybe others, such as Tomitribe who only provide the WebProfile,
will chime in with some examples of their own but I can tell you that
since Red Hat implemented both the WebProfile and full profile in our
community and product app servers we have seen significant adoption of
both and those developers make the choice based on some of the reasons
I gave and they clearly understand why and believe their actions are
valid too :)

Mark.

On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 1:59 PM, Dominik Hufnagel
<mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Well, there certainly are users which are not happy with just the full
> profiles and I am sure there are reasons. I do not say there is no need for
> more profiles, but until now I have not seen reasons for it, which justifies
> it.
>
> For me, your arguments do not justify the complexity for users having to
> choose between profiles. If I start a project and having to make decisions
> on what profile to use, how would that be less expensive than running a
> cloud machine with 50MB more for years? Let’s take AWS for example, where a
> block storage costs about 0.1-0.2$ per GB per Month.
>
> Regarding boot times, may you/one can specify what fast means? I have a
> wildfly app booting in < 10 seconds where a spring boot app I am currently
> working on (with almost just REST interfaces) needs > 15 seconds to boot.
>
>
>
> If you think about the buzzword IoT, then clearly the full profile may not
> suit. But I am not sure if this has to be covered under Jakarta EE.
>
>
>
> I am with you in terms of complexity and portability. For small
> applications, where mostly one war or app is deployed, it would be
> beneficial to be able to configure the Application Server (DB, JMS-Queues,
> …) with any mechanism from inside the war (let’s say a properties file or
> something). I would love to see such mechanisms in Jakarta EE, but this is
> not really related to profiles.
>
>
>
> I also think it would be beneficial to have a legacy profile for the stuff
> that is not anymore ‘state ot the art’, so that the main profile could be
> more lean.
>
>
>
> To be clear: I have no final opinion about this topic yet. I just like to
> see some valid arguments for having more profiles or for not have more
> profiles. What I also did not see in this discussion so far, are examples
> for profiles and how they fit together. This would help getting a clearer
> image of the needs from those who argue for having more profiles.
>
>
>
> Dominik
>
>
>
> Von: jakarta.ee-community-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:jakarta.ee-community-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] Im Auftrag von Mark Little
> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 17. Mai 2018 13:47
>
>
> An: Jakarta EE community discussions <jakarta.ee-community@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Betreff: Re: [jakarta.ee-community] About Profiles
>
>
>
> This isn’t just about vendor choice. You are certainly not alone in being
> happy with the full profile option. However, there are other classes of
> users/developers that aren’t and these have existed since the dawn of J2EE.
> For example, some people want to deploy their favour app server on to
> constrained devices which may be running on the cloud where an additional
> 50MB costs real money when run for hours or days or weeks or longer. Some
> developers want to reduce the maintenance complexity or boot time of their
> favourite app server by stripping out those capabilities they don’t want.
> Now you could argue that these developers could just do this themselves
> anyway, e.g., JBossAS has supported this kind of pruning from the start.
> However, if you want portability and interoperability of your apps so you’re
> not tied to a specific app server implementation/vendor, having standardised
> profiles is the right approach.
>
>
>
> Mark.
>
>
>
>
>
> On 16 May 2018, at 23:16, Dominik Hufnagel <mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
>
> As a user of JavaEE, I do not get the idea behind having multiple profiles.
> May someone can explain the benefits for users? If I can have a single
> profile with all available features, I would take it and I do not bother
> using a server which is 50MB larger of one with a „smaller“ profile. I can
> understand that it could be harder for vendors to enter the market having to
> provide the full profile. But for me, this would not be an argument for
> using smaller profiles. I’d rather take a server from a vendor which offers
> me the full profile.
>
>
>
> If I would use the MicroProfile and want to have JPA, do I have to add
> external dependencies? I really like some of the new APIs of the
> MicroProfile and would be happy to see them coming to JakartaEE.
>
> Dominik
>
>
>
>
>
> Von: jakarta.ee-community-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:jakarta.ee-community-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] Im Auftrag von Mark Little
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 16. Mai 2018 11:42
> An: Jakarta EE community discussions <jakarta.ee-community@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Betreff: Re: [jakarta.ee-community] About Profiles
>
>
>
> Hopefully others have responded already but … it’s for both: quick summary …
> vendors so they can ensure conformance and users so they can ensure
> portability and interoperability of their apps.
>
>
>
> Speaking with my MicroProfile hat on, I for one would not want to trade the
> current MicroProfile for a full Jakarta EE profile and neither would our
> users.
>
>
>
> Mark.
>
>
>
>
>
> On 7 May 2018, at 17:33, arjan tijms <arjan.tijms@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
>
> So then the first question is perhaps; who wants profiles and benefits from
> it? Is a profile intended for vendors or for users?
>
>
>
>
>
> ---
>
> Mark Little
>
> mlittle@xxxxxxxxxx
>
>
>
> JBoss, by Red Hat
>
> Registered Address: Red Hat Ltd, 6700 Cork Airport Business Park, Kinsale
> Road, Co. Cork.
> Registered in the Companies Registration Office, Parnell House, 14 Parnell
> Square, Dublin 1, Ireland, No.304873
> Directors:Michael Cunningham (USA), Vicky Wiseman (USA), Michael O'Neill,
> Keith Phelan, Matt Parson (USA)
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> jakarta.ee-community mailing list
> jakarta.ee-community@xxxxxxxxxxx
> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from
> this list, visit
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakarta.ee-community
>
>
>
> ---
>
> Mark Little
>
> mlittle@xxxxxxxxxx
>
>
>
> JBoss, by Red Hat
>
> Registered Address: Red Hat Ltd, 6700 Cork Airport Business Park, Kinsale
> Road, Co. Cork.
> Registered in the Companies Registration Office, Parnell House, 14 Parnell
> Square, Dublin 1, Ireland, No.304873
> Directors:Michael Cunningham (USA), Vicky Wiseman (USA), Michael O'Neill,
> Keith Phelan, Matt Parson (USA)
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> jakarta.ee-community mailing list
> jakarta.ee-community@xxxxxxxxxxx
> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from
> this list, visit
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakarta.ee-community
>