Skip to main content
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [jakarta.ee-community] About Profiles
Hello, Dominik.

Being a Java technology consumer focused on the buzzword IoT for years (M2M before then etc), I can tell you that Jakarta EE has places both embedded and on server side. I can argument for that, but I don't think that's the point. Nor I think that the point is upfront cost of deciding which profile (really? more than 30 sec to choose?) or machine uptime costs.

The point is that profiles provide choice. Choice is always good - otherwise, why have standards and different vendors?

Having a single profile, there's no choice. With profiles, I can choose. And I can defer the choice as long as I want: I can start with "full" and trim down to "web" later, with a single dependency change in the parent POM.

There's no clear downside for having profiles. There are clear downsides for NOT having profiles.

Regards,
Leonardo.




On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 7:59 AM, 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@eclipse.org [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@eclipse.org>
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@eclipse.org] Im Auftrag von Mark Little
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 16. Mai 2018 11:42
An: Jakarta EE community discussions <jakarta.ee-community@eclipse.org>
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

 

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@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

 

---

Mark Little

 

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@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