• Open Menu Close Menu
  • Apple
  • Shopping Bag
  • Apple
  • Mac
  • iPad
  • iPhone
  • Watch
  • TV
  • Music
  • Support
  • Search apple.com
  • Shopping Bag
 

Lists

Open Menu Close Menu
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Lists hosted on this site
  • Email the Postmaster
  • Tips for posting to public mailing lists
Re: A WebObjects article on Appleinsider
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: A WebObjects article on Appleinsider


  • Subject: Re: A WebObjects article on Appleinsider
  • From: William Hatch <email@hidden>
  • Date: Wed, 08 Jul 2009 13:16:20 -0400


Bill


On Jul 8, 2009, at 12:01 PM, Chuck Hill wrote:


On Jul 8, 2009, at 5:46 AM, William Hatch wrote:


On Jul 8, 2009, at 7:04 AM, David Avendasora wrote:

Yeah, this is really good news. Now that WO releases won't be tied to OS X and Xcode releases, I'm betting we'll see far more frequent releases of updates to the frameworks.

seriously? I remember the exact inverse statements being made when, only four-ish years ago, they tied WO's release schedule back into the main development tools. I think it's good news, but hopefully it means that they'll stop developing their unnecessary deployment that virtually nobody uses

??? I'd guest that the majority of WO projects are deployed like this. Servlet deployment is a distant second.

Definitely, and my point is/was that perhaps if there weren't resources going into maintaining a deployment option that the rest of the world doesn't really use or care about, maybe it would help on what I would consider to be the more important aspect of WO, that being as a development framework. And, also, if deploying war didn't totally suck ass for the most part, perhaps others wouldn't be so reticent and apprehensive about deploying WO. Seriously, the bottom line is that problems deploying in a standard container like tomcat are certainly not helping the cause any. I personally could absolutely not care less about wotaskd and monitor, and given that there's another option that's much more ubiquitous, I further propose that the rest of us adopt the same attitude.

Chuck


and focus on the frameworks instead. I hate the thought of one more minute going into maintaining wotaskd, monitor and everything else that goes along with WebObjects as a stand alone application server. They should have done it long ago, and in all honesty, we should have been willing to let that go a long time ago, if it would have helped with resources inside apple devoted to developing WO.



-- Chuck Hill Senior Consultant / VP Development

Practical WebObjects - for developers who want to increase their overall knowledge of WebObjects or who are trying to solve specific problems.
http://www.global-village.net/products/practical_webobjects








_______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Webobjects-dev mailing list (email@hidden) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: This email sent to email@hidden
  • Follow-Ups:
    • Re: A WebObjects article on Appleinsider
      • From: Chuck Hill <email@hidden>
References: 
 >A WebObjects article on Appleinsider (From: Paul Stringer <email@hidden>)
 >Re: A WebObjects article on Appleinsider (From: David Avendasora <email@hidden>)
 >Re: A WebObjects article on Appleinsider (From: William Hatch <email@hidden>)
 >Re: A WebObjects article on Appleinsider (From: Chuck Hill <email@hidden>)

  • Prev by Date: Re: A WebObjects article on Appleinsider
  • Next by Date: Re: A WebObjects article on Appleinsider
  • Previous by thread: Re: A WebObjects article on Appleinsider
  • Next by thread: Re: A WebObjects article on Appleinsider
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread