I agree. I think we need to clarify the problem
with EJB. Is it technical, as in there's a lot of
baggage/fat that simply cannot be shed without completely
killing the tech? Especially from an implementation
perspective?
Or is it more a problem of perception, where a whole
generation of developers have grown up hearing nothing but
horror stories from the days of entity beans and thus,
would want to steer clear of EJB and consequently, the
platform itself?
Personally I lean towards "spring cleaning" the
internals of EJBs if it's a problem of the former and
leaving the technology alone.
Why? Because it just works. A single annotation does a
lot of heavy lifting on my behalf. And that is cool. It's
also easy to teach newcomers.
From a business perspective, I'd ask, which would add
more weight to portraying the platform as modernising?
- A test spec/attempt to standardize consuming AI on
the platform?
- Or killing EJBs?
If the goal is to portray the platform as alive and
modernising, I think nothing is more a testament than an
incubator spec that taps into arguably the most hyped tech
of our time?
We may have different views of the whole AI stuff, but
if Spring already has Spring AI, Quarkus has native
integration with LangChaing4J, where's Jakarta?
So though EJB may be a polarising tech depending on who
you speak with, I think if the goal of EE 12 is to show
that it's still a technology that is evolving with the
times, then our target lies elsewhere.
Not necessarily EJB. At least not this time.
I also think that until now, EJBs are not
fully replacable with other Jakarta EE constructs. And
thus we shouldn’t try to hide EJBs from developers
learning Jakarta EE. In fact, teaching developers about
EJBs simplifies things a lot. With just a single
@Stateless or @Songleton annotation they get
transactions automatically, can easily define timers,
concurrency is handled (no state should be in stateless,
singletons are syncrhonized).
Yes, it’s possible to rewrite EJBs with
other constructs but the resulting code is much more
verbose and easy to get wrong - timers in Concurrency
require to call a method to trigger them, running a
method on startup is more verbose compared to @Startup
on a singleton EJB, ApplicationScoped CDI beans are not
thread safe unlike Singleton EJBs, @RolesAllowed only
works on EJBs and not CDI beans, etc.
Jakarta EE still needs improvements to
fully replace EJB. And even then it would be good to
have a single CDI annotation to enable all the features
of EJB in a CDI bean. Until then, it’s better to teach
EJBs and then explain how to use the new concepts in
Jakarta EE to avoid EJBs for advanced developers.
Ondro
Hi
all,
I completely agree with that. EJBs are not bad per
se and should not be abandoned.
Everyone is free to use them or not.
Best regards,
Bernd
Am 28.10.24 um 14:54 schrieb Ralph Soika via
jakarta.ee-community:
> Hello,
>
> I became aware of this discussion through the
topic "EJB -> CDI migration" and would like to
briefly
> share my thoughts about it.
> My fear here is to "ban" EJBs as something
outdated, complicated and unnecessary. But is that
right?
> I myself run with imixs.org <https://www.imixs.org>
a very large Jakarta EE project. And my opinion
> is that you should always implement the
DataAccessLayer as also complex ProcessingServices
in a
> stateless EJB in order to make use of the
transaction capability.
> I do know that you can also use CDI for data
access. But is it the same?
>
> For example in my own project (a BPMN workflow
engine) the DataAccess Service as also the Engine
> itself is implemented as a stateless EJB.
> A project that is using the library just need
to inject the WorkflowEngine. The user does not have
> to think about transactions or EJBs at this
moment. The app developer can now extend the engine
> behavior by implementing so called 'Plug-Ins'
as simple CDI beans. Such a CDI bean is a kind of
> adapter class that can for example react on
specific CDI Events in the processing life-cycle.
And of
> course the developer can again inject the
DataService form the Workflow Engine to create new
data.
>
> The point is that if something goes totally
wrong, the default transaction manager takes care
about
> the rollback over all layers.
>
> And this all comes for free just because of
using the stateless local EJB pattern. For the
developer
> there is no need to think about EJBs at all.
>
> I may be wrong here, but I would always advise
a developer to implement the data access layer via
> EJBs to keep the rest of the application as
lean as possible.
> Therefore, in my opinion, EJBs play an
important role. A tutorial should not hide its
concepts.
>
> Best regards
>
> Ralph
>
> On 28.10.24 14:21, Reza Rahman via
jakarta.ee-community wrote:
>> I think the Tutorial refactoring work could
easily be tagged “good first issue” and “help
wanted”.
>> We have a shockingly low number of those
across EE4J projects.
>>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> *From:* Kito Mann
<kito.mann@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> *Sent:* Sunday, October 27, 2024 11:50 PM
>> *To:* jakarta.ee-spec@xxxxxxxxxxx
<jakarta.ee-spec@xxxxxxxxxxx>;
Jakarta EE community discussions
>> <jakarta.ee-community@xxxxxxxxxxx>;
jakarta.ee-marketing@xxxxxxxxxxx
<jakarta.ee-
>> marketing@xxxxxxxxxxx>;
Reza Rahman <reza_rahman@xxxxxxxx>
>> *Cc:* Jakarta EE Ambassadors <jakartaee-ambassadors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>;
juneau001@xxxxxxxxx
>> <juneau001@xxxxxxxxx>;
Kito Mann <kito.mann@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> *Subject:* Re: EJB -> CDI migration (was
Re: Defining Jakarta EE 12 Scope in Program Plan)
>> I love all three of these ideas:
>>
>> 1. EJB -> CDI Migration Guide
>> 2. New EJB -> CDI Migration talk
>> 3. Updating the Jakarta EE Tutorial to
remove EJB when possible
>>
>> (3) is non-trivial since a lot of work
needs to be done upgrading/rewriting the examples in
>> general, but that doesn’t mean I can’t at
least break that work down into the issue
tracker. Also,
>> the intro (which I rewrote) specifically
does not mention EJB.
>>
>> I’d like to add another: Writing an
OpenRewrite for migrating from EJB->CDI.
>>
>> ___
>>
>> Kito D. Mann <https://kitomann.com> |
@kito99@mastodon.social <https://mastodon.social/@kito99>|
>> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/kitomann/>
>> Java Champion | Google Developer Expert
Alumni
>> Expert consulting and training: Cloud
architecture and modernization, Java/Jakarta EE, Web
>> Components, Angular, Mobile Web
>> Virtua, Inc. | virtua.tech <http://virtua.tech>
>> +1 203-998-0403
>>
>> * Enterprise development, front and back.
Listen to Stackd Podcast <http://stackdpodcast.com/>.
>> * Speak at conferences? Check out
SpeakerTrax <https://speakertrax.com>.
>> On Oct 27, 2024 at 2:46 PM -0400, Reza
Rahman <reza_rahman@xxxxxxxx>,
wrote:
>>
>> I am moving comments on my Jakarta EE
12 Google Doc
>> (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1U2qEqF9K969t5b3YuX4cwex5LJPvF3bt1w27cdKNpDM/edit?usp=sharing)
>> to Jakarta EE mailing lists when
possible. The problem with Google Docs
>> comments is that they do not scale very
well, aren't very readable on
>> smaller devices, and do not archive
well. I will do so one email per
>> comment. The person commenting is
copied.
>>
>> Context: Why does replacing EJB matter?
>>
>> Josh Juneau (Community): Are there any
comprehensive tutorials on how to
>> utilize CDI rather than EJB for
querying entities? It seems like these
>> tutorials need to be made front and
center in an effort to help steer
>> people to CDI and to show that EJB is
no longer needed in many cases.
>>
>> Reza Rahman (Microsoft): Good point. As
of Jakarta EE 11, it is indeed
>> possible to just use CDI now for basic
CRUD in a transactional and
>> thread safe manner with Jakarta
Persistence. The same for EJB
>> @Asynchronous and @Schedule. At the
bare minimum, this is worthy of an
>> Eclipse Foundation newsletter article
and/or JakartaOne talk. The
>> material could cover where EJB is not
needed any more and where it is
>> still needed. The title could be
something attention grabbing like -
>> "EJB is Dead, Long-Live CDI and Jakarta
EE". We could also ensure a
>> revised Jakarta EE 11 Tutorial can
avoid using EJB when possible. Maybe
>> Kito could comment on this?
Additionally, the Marketing Committee has
>> been sponsoring some guides. Could we
consider already starting an EJB
>> migration guide?
>>
>> On 10/22/2024 5:30 AM, Reza Rahman
wrote:
>>
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> I would like to see if we can
define clear, compelling, and specific
>> scope for Jakarta EE 12 as part of
the Steering Committee Program
>> Plan:
>> https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1xUNDHMP_qTHH1wA3m0yCmWVf_sHp41Qd7Opq3FhgINs/edit?
>> usp=sharing.
>> I believe this is of critical
importance at this juncture. If I did
>> not think so, I would not bother
trying. I have detailed all the
>> rationale here:
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1U2qEqF9K969t5b3YuX4cwex5LJPvF3bt1w27cdKNpDM/edit?
>> usp=sharing.
>> For those that recall, something
very similar was done for Jakarta EE
>> 11, so this isn't exactly without
precedent.
>>
>> I would like to see if this can be
done in the following couple of
>> weeks, when the Program Plan is
due.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Reza
>>
>>
>> Reza Rahman
>>
>> Principal Program Manager
>>
>> Java on Azure at Microsoft
>>
>> reza.rahman@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>
>> +1 717 329 8149
>>
>>
>>
_______________________________________________
>> jakarta.ee-community mailing list
>> jakarta.ee-community@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> To unsubscribe from this list,
visithttps://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakarta.ee-community
> --
>
> *Imixs Software Solutions GmbH*
> *Web:* www.imixs.com <http://www.imixs.com>
*Phone:* +49 (0)89-452136 16
> *Timezone:* Europe/Berlin - CET/CEST
> *Office:* Frei-Otto-Str. 4, 80797 München
> Registergericht: Amtsgericht München, HRB
136045
> Geschäftsführer: Gaby Heinle u. Ralph Soika
>
> *Imixs* is an open source company, read more: www.imixs.org
<http://www.imixs.org>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> jakarta.ee-community mailing list
> jakarta.ee-community@xxxxxxxxxxx
> To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakarta.ee-community
--
Prof. Dr. Bernd Müller
Ostfalia
Hochschule für angewandte Wissenschaften
- Hochschule Braunschweig/Wolfenbüttel -
Fakultät Informatik
Salzdahlumer Straße 46/48
38302 Wolfenbüttel
Tel +49 5331 939 31160
Fax +49 5331 939 31004
Web www.ostfalia.de / www.pdbm.de
_______________________________________________
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
_______________________________________________