Re: A WebObjects article on Appleinsider
Re: A WebObjects article on Appleinsider
- Subject: Re: A WebObjects article on Appleinsider
- From: Guido Neitzer <email@hidden>
- Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2009 18:16:09 -0700
On 8. Jul. 2009, at 15:09 , Mike Schrag wrote:
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 and focus on the frameworks
instead.
Oh, you mean that deployment style virtually everybody but a few
folks are using should be dropped?
I've since reinterpreted Bill's comment to mean "everyone in the
world of java" not "everyone in the world of wo" ... And I would
agree with that,
Somehow - with that, yeah, it's possible to agree, if there were a
better solution. But is J2EE a better solution? I don't think so.
I would love to see war deployment not suck and be less clunky -- I
think switching to jar frameworks probably makes a lot more sense
for j2ee deployment, for instance.
Right, but the problem here is not war deployment, because the really
clunky parts are the J2EE app servers. This is another layer of
complexity which sucks even more than the "traditional style".
cug
_______________________________________________
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