| Re: [jakartaee-platform-dev] RMI-IIOP and CORBA |
Markus, Who is "we"? Your company, the JUG or something else? Sure there is lots of legacy used by many clients especially in Central Europe where not everyone is willing or allowed to rush into the Cloud immediately. I am also about to help major customers with Eclipse technologies that are over 10 years old now and Eclipse Foundation has long archived, so I see nothing wrong with doing the same here. Werner From: Markus KARG Bill, we are maintaining a huge RMI/IIOP based core base for our customers world wide, so at time of writing we are an active massive user of that technology. It is a lot of work to replace RMI/IIOP in that code, and it will need many months to finish this already started work. In the end this consumes about 10% of our annual development investments. You can imagine, we discussed this a lot and our opinion is heavily biased due to the sum of money we have to invest. Nevertheless, we do NOT veto your plan: 0 for removing RMI-IIOP and CORBA from the platform by simply not adopting it from Java SE. It is a totally outdated technology and has to get pruned one fine day. But we think it would be better to officially announce it to be "deprecated" in EE 9 and finally "pruned" in EE 10 (even if this technically is incorrect, it is what users feel about it). 0 for whether products may ship RMI-IIOP and CORBA. While this breaks WORA we understand that it is better to overhaul existing applications to make them future-proof. Also, it opens the business model of paid RMI-IIOP and CORBA niche products. If we would do the EE 9 / EE 10 steps proposed above, product owners have time to prepare this. Regards -Markus I just realized that the Jakarta EE 9 Release Plan doesn't say anything explicit about RMI-IIOP or CORBA. They are both removed from JDK 11, and Jakarta EE 9 explicitly removes EJB interoperability, which depends on RMI-IIOP, but nothing is said about RMI-IIOP or CORBA themselves. My original Jakarta EE 9 proposal was explicit that RMI-IIOP and CORBA would not be included. I think we should update the current plan to make this explicit as well. Note that this means any product providing backwards compatibility will need to provide a complete ORB and RMI-IIOP support, including the javax.rmi APIs. (The javax.rmi APIs would not be migrated to the jakarta namespace.) Comments? _______________________________________________ jakartaee-platform-dev mailing list jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-platform-dev _______________________________________________ jakartaee-platform-dev mailing list jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-platform-dev |