Skip to main content
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [jakarta.ee-community] [jakartaee-ambassadors] Re: [starter-dev] Full vs Platform
Hi all,

Please let me share my thoughts also in the hopes it helps in getting this discussion solved.

I think the concept of a Profile is a clearly defined concept within Jakarta EE. A Profile in general represents/bundles a selection of Specifications that vendors can use to scope and verify their implementation with. We currently have three official, well-defined Profiles in Jakarta EE:
- Full Profile
- Web Profile
- Core Profile
Let's keep this terminology and use it appropriately in the right context. So in the Starter, when asked which Profile is going to be used, simply use these names. No addition of anything that says Platform or whatever, this is a term for a different context. If it's possibly not clear for people what Profiles are as a concept, just add a textual explanation.

Over the past years, lingo using the word Platform has come up and as far as I understand it, is being used as a synonym for the Full Profile. But is it? Is Web Profile not (partially) "the" or "a" Platform? For me, it feels that Jakarta EE is a brand and the technology it represents IS A Platform. Regardless of the Profile being discussed. Because whatever Profile a vendor's implementation is built with, as a developer, you can build applications ON this implementation as a Platform. Again, this is my own perception.

To conclude, I think that we need to use the Profiles in the right context and agree on what the term Platform means for all parties involved to understand. Hope this helps.

Edwin

On Wed, 5 Apr 2023 at 12:25, Ondro Mihályi <mihalyi@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
If we go this way and want to make profiles and the Platform (a.k.a. "Full" profile) stand on the same line, then I would strongly request from the Platform project to introduce a naming strategy that would reflect that. Because if we have "Platform", "Web Profile" and "Core Profile", their names are clearly not giving the message that they are equally endorsed.

To me, with this naming, "Platform" will always stand out, while profiles would be curated subsets of the Platform. That's why many people use the term "Full" profile, so that we can refer to "Full Profile", "Web Profile", and "Core Profile, in a unified way. But I hear from the Jakarta Platform spec team that this isn't what they want.

I think the Jakarta Platform team should clarify whether we want to treat the Platform spec and profiles equally (and change the naming to reflect that), or we want to prefer the Platform spec over profiles, which is implied by the current naming. Otherwise we'll continue having confusion about this forever.

Ondro

On Wed, Apr 5, 2023 at 2:28 PM Reza Rahman <reza_rahman@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Response in-line for context. Good discussion points, certainly.

On Tue, 4 Apr 2023 at 11:07, mengqy <mengqy@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

In fact, furthermore, I have a suggestion new here maybe not be relevant to the current topic which is: 


4\ One Jakarta EE to the world.


To simplify and focus our promotion resource on one thing and get the best from it, maybe we do not need to highlight too much the Web and the Core on the release page of the official site, etc., we say to the world Jakarta EE is the cloud-native Java specification, people just need to know one thing is that Jakarta EE is both for web and microservice, but no need to know the detail in profiles in the first time, this will simplify the understanding of Jakarta EE and be good to promote it in the long run.


Web and Core profiles can still have their development plan, certification plan, etc. But no need to show all the content and description in the official content. Vendors or people who want to know the detail, or to certificate, can contact us for more information. So we can focus all of our resources to build only one brand, developers can also talk about one thing and not need to discuss the difference between like this.

RR: I think this again comes down to how one chooses to see the somewhat ambiguous concept of the "Platform" and how it relates to profiles. In my view, we should avoid giving what is effectively the "Full Profile" (the term used by Red Hat) significant special status. This may prove to be very important as things like the Core Profile potentially make profiles even more relevant than in the past. That's the thought behind how things are outlined in the UI and Archetype now.

That said, this is also perhaps something that we should not make a firm decision in the starter project but bring it to to the Platform mailing list for consensus and guidance for us to implement.


 






Eric (QingYu Meng)   Marketing Director
--------------
Primeton Software, Inc. (Stock Code: 688118)
Specialize in - Digital Middle Platform - Digital Transformation Accelerating
 
 
 
------------------ Original ------------------
From:  "L.walid (PowerM)"<l.walid@xxxxxxxxx>;
Date:  Tue, Apr 4, 2023 12:52 PM
To:  "Jakarta EE community discussions"<jakarta.ee-community@xxxxxxxxxxx>;
Cc:  "Jakarta EE Ambassadors"<jakartaee-ambassadors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; "starter developer discussions"<starter-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>;
Subject:  Re: [jakarta.ee-community] Full vs Platform
 
Agree with removing the profile 

On Tue, Apr 4, 2023 at 4:44 AM Vedran Smid <vedransmid@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi,

Maybe just remove 'profile' from the title:

Jakarta EE
- Platform
- Web Profile
- Core Profile

On Tue, 4 Apr 2023 at 02:37, Ondro Mihályi <mihalyi@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Maybe even a better solution is to rethink the whole Platform/Profile option in the Starter. Now, the option’s title is “Jakarta EE Profile”, but (full) Jakarta EE Platform is not a profile itself:


What about changing it to:

Jakarta EE API collection:

- Jakarta EE Platform
- Web Profile
- Core Profile

What do you think?

Ondro



On Tue, 4 Apr 2023 at 02:26, Ondro Mihályi <mihalyi@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Another response on Twitter, more towards using Jakarta EE Platform rather than Full Platform: 

Ondro

On Mon, 3 Apr 2023 at 14:44, Reza Rahman <reza_rahman@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Also sharing the conversation with the broader community on the mailing lists.

On 4/3/2023 8:27 AM, reza_rahman@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
Thanks Ondro for sharing the conversation with the broader community. Hopefully we will get a bit more independent user feedback on the subtle, but real problem some of us have observed for some time now.

If this remains an unresolved discussion on Friday, I’ll bring it up to the platform. I believe it is legitimate discussion there too.
 
From: starter-dev <starter-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of Ondro Mihályi <mihalyi@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, April 3, 2023 6:42 AM
To: starter developer discussions <starter-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [starter-dev] Full vs Platform
 
Here's another response on Twitter, which suggests using words like "full" or "complete", rather than just Platform: https://twitter.com/kjjaeger/status/1642759395925688324

On Mon, Apr 3, 2023 at 12:54 AM reza_rahman@xxxxxxxxx <reza_rahman@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I am not so sure. I don’t think things are so draconian that we couldn’t add a simple parenthetical term that may in practically aid usability. I think the least we can do is hear people out.
 
From: starter-dev <starter-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of Ivar Grimstad via starter-dev <starter-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, April 2, 2023 6:37 PM
To: starter developer discussions <starter-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Ivar Grimstad <ivar.grimstad@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [starter-dev] Full vs Platform
 
To be honest, I don't see why this has to be debated any longer.
The Platform Project is pretty clear on the terminology. It's not up to this project to change that.

Ivar

On Sun, Apr 2, 2023, 18:22 reza_rahman@xxxxxxxxx <reza_rahman@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Please consider weighing in on this matter, especially as a committer. I think by this Friday should be sufficient time to resolve this matter in one direction or the other.
 
From: starter-dev <starter-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of Ondro Mihályi <mihalyi@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, March 31, 2023 5:15 PM
To: starter developer discussions <starter-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [starter-dev] Full vs Platform
 
I'm strongly in favor of keeping the word "full" in the option. Probably something like Platform (full), or full Platform, with "full" all in lower case, not "Full".

My reasoning:

Although the name of the full specification is just Jakarta EE Platform, there are several mentions of the word "full" in the Platform spec. Including "full platform" in the section 2.2 Profiles: https://jakarta.ee/specifications/platform/10/jakarta-platform-spec-10.0.html#profiles, which specifically mentions "Jakarta EE platform” umbrella as something that unites all profiles or "the full platform". Here a screenshot, my email continues below:



So, I would say that Platform is generally used for the umbrella over all profiles and full platform, while "full platform" means the whole Jakarta EE Platform. I believe that's how most other people understand it and use the terms. Also a lot of vendors use "Full" to refer to the Jakarta EE Platform, and Web to refer to the Web Profile. Examples:
Ondro

On Thu, Mar 30, 2023 at 5:23 PM Emily Jiang via starter-dev <starter-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi Reza,

I had the same comment regarding the `full` instead of `platform`. We had to correct people saying `full` in the past and now I think the correct word `platform` is used across the board. I will vote for `Platfiorm` not saying anything such as `Full` to be consistent with the specification release.

Thanks
Emily


On Thu, Mar 30, 2023 at 2:42 PM reza_rahman@xxxxxxxxx <reza_rahman@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Can folks (especially committers and key stakeholders) kindly weigh in on this one: https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/starter/issues/238?

To be honest, I think this is a usability hiccup we basically have with Jakarta EE. We have the notion of profiles, but there isn’t actually a “Full Profile”. It’s just the “Platform”. In my experience, this invariably confuses newcomers.

I tried to reconcile this by simply saying “Full Platform” in the UI. I think either “(Full) Platform” or “Platform (Full)” does the trick too.

What do others think? To be clear, I am not categorically opposed to just saying “Platform”. I don’t think it’s the best but it is workable. It’s certainly what the actual specification says.

P.S.: I opposed this nomenclature almost ten years ago. Bill and Linda had many opinions I never fully agreed with including keeping EJB going much past its expiration date. To me this is yet another one of the Bill/Linda legacies.


_______________________________________________
starter-dev mailing list
starter-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/starter-dev


--
Thanks
Emily

_______________________________________________
starter-dev mailing list
starter-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/starter-dev
_______________________________________________
starter-dev mailing list
starter-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/starter-dev
_______________________________________________
starter-dev mailing list
starter-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/starter-dev
_______________________________________________
jakarta.ee-community mailing list
jakarta.ee-community@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakarta.ee-community
_______________________________________________
jakarta.ee-community mailing list
jakarta.ee-community@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakarta.ee-community
_______________________________________________
jakarta.ee-community mailing list
jakarta.ee-community@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakarta.ee-community
--
Best regards, 

Walid Largou
Solution Architect / IBM Champion
Power Maroc
Mobile : +212 621 31 98 71
320 Bd Zertouni 6th Floor, Casablanca, Morocco


This message is confidential .Its contents do not constitute a commitment by Power Maroc S.A.R.L except where provided for in a written agreement between you and Power Maroc S.A.R.L. Any authorized disclosure, use or dissemination, either whole or partial, is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient of the message, please notify the sender immediately.
_______________________________________________
jakarta.ee-community mailing list
jakarta.ee-community@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakarta.ee-community

_______________________________________________
jakarta.ee-community mailing list
jakarta.ee-community@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakarta.ee-community
_______________________________________________
starter-dev mailing list
starter-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/starter-dev

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Jakarta EE Ambassadors" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to jakartaee-ambassadors+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jakartaee-ambassadors/CABd%3DrHenV73Fj2hF06ecmUic71_VUTJi3Rh2AwuWxL%3DXmqsJ%2BQ%40mail.gmail.com.

Back to the top