3:28 p.m.
Hi Team,
3 weeks ago I started a consulting mission in a big Insurance company that
is Redhat / JBoss customer. They use most of Java EE 5 implementation
provided by JBoss 5 EAP except for EJB 3. No EJB because it's also a Spring
Shop. One of my missions is to help them to build their next official stack
based on JBoss EAP 6 (which should be out in January). So I try to promote
full Java EE 6 stack (with CDI and EJB 3.1) and put Spring aside as an
alternative/Legacy framework. But it won't work if they don't have a
supported solution to use their old Spring components / Knowledge in this
new stack.
More globally one big objection I encounter very often with the adoption of
CDI (at least in France) is investment done in Spring. So if we want to
facilitate the adoption we have to provide a Bridge with Spring to allow
devs to integrate the "de facto standard" in the "official standard".
I know that Rick Hightower and CDISource Team wrote a nice extension on the
subject (https://github.com/CDISource/cdisource) but I think such a module
should be endorsed by a company that'll provide support on it like RH.
Seam 2 provided this Bridge so it seems normal to provide it as well in Seam
3.
What is your opinion ?
Thanks,
--
Antoine Sabot-Durand
4:09 p.m.
Yes, we should do this :-)
Marius is the owner.
On 29 Jun 2011, at 14:28, Antoine Sabot-Durand wrote:
Hi Team,
3 weeks ago I started a consulting mission in a big Insurance company that is Redhat /
JBoss customer. They use most of Java EE 5 implementation provided by JBoss 5 EAP except
for EJB 3. No EJB because it's also a Spring Shop. One of my missions is to help them
to build their next official stack based on JBoss EAP 6 (which should be out in January).
So I try to promote full Java EE 6 stack (with CDI and EJB 3.1) and put Spring aside as an
alternative/Legacy framework. But it won't work if they don't have a supported
solution to use their old Spring components / Knowledge in this new stack.
More globally one big objection I encounter very often with the adoption of CDI (at least
in France) is investment done in Spring. So if we want to facilitate the adoption we have
to provide a Bridge with Spring to allow devs to integrate the "de facto
standard" in the "official standard".
I know that Rick Hightower and CDISource Team wrote a nice extension on the subject
(https://github.com/CDISource/cdisource) but I think such a module should be endorsed by a
company that'll provide support on it like RH.
Seam 2 provided this Bridge so it seems normal to provide it as well in Seam 3.
What is your opinion ?
Thanks,
--
Antoine Sabot-Durand
_______________________________________________
seam-dev mailing list
seam-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/seam-dev
4:18 p.m.
Your smiley suggest that this has been already discussed / decided. I missed
those discussion apparently. Sorry...
Antoine
2011/6/29 Pete Muir <pmuir(a)redhat.com>
Yes, we should do this :-)
Marius is the owner.
On 29 Jun 2011, at 14:28, Antoine Sabot-Durand wrote:
> Hi Team,
>
> 3 weeks ago I started a consulting mission in a big Insurance company
that is Redhat / JBoss customer. They use most of Java EE 5 implementation
provided by JBoss 5 EAP except for EJB 3. No EJB because it's also a Spring
Shop. One of my missions is to help them to build their next official stack
based on JBoss EAP 6 (which should be out in January). So I try to promote
full Java EE 6 stack (with CDI and EJB 3.1) and put Spring aside as an
alternative/Legacy framework. But it won't work if they don't have a
supported solution to use their old Spring components / Knowledge in this
new stack.
> More globally one big objection I encounter very often with the adoption
of CDI (at least in France) is investment done in Spring. So if we want to
facilitate the adoption we have to provide a Bridge with Spring to allow
devs to integrate the "de facto standard" in the "official
standard".
> I know that Rick Hightower and CDISource Team wrote a nice extension on
the subject (https://github.com/CDISource/cdisource) but I think such a
module should be endorsed by a company that'll provide support on it like
RH.
> Seam 2 provided this Bridge so it seems normal to provide it as well in
Seam 3.
> What is your opinion ?
>
> Thanks,
>
> --
> Antoine Sabot-Durand
>
> _______________________________________________
> seam-dev mailing list
> seam-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/seam-dev
--
Antoine Sabot-Durand
Manager technique
-------------------------------
Ippon Technologies
3, rue Bellanger
92300 Levallois Perret
t. 01.46.12.48.48
f. 01.46.12.48.49
p. 06.08.55.34.26
e. asd(a)ippon.fr
www.ippon.fr
4:20 p.m.
It has been discussed multiple times, but it was never delivered on. I set it as a
requirement for Seam 3.1 when I handed over to Shane, but not sure what has happened
since.
On 29 Jun 2011, at 15:18, Antoine Sabot-Durand wrote:
Your smiley suggest that this has been already discussed / decided. I
missed those discussion apparently. Sorry...
Antoine
2011/6/29 Pete Muir <pmuir(a)redhat.com>
Yes, we should do this :-)
Marius is the owner.
On 29 Jun 2011, at 14:28, Antoine Sabot-Durand wrote:
> Hi Team,
>
> 3 weeks ago I started a consulting mission in a big Insurance company that is Redhat
/ JBoss customer. They use most of Java EE 5 implementation provided by JBoss 5 EAP except
for EJB 3. No EJB because it's also a Spring Shop. One of my missions is to help them
to build their next official stack based on JBoss EAP 6 (which should be out in January).
So I try to promote full Java EE 6 stack (with CDI and EJB 3.1) and put Spring aside as an
alternative/Legacy framework. But it won't work if they don't have a supported
solution to use their old Spring components / Knowledge in this new stack.
> More globally one big objection I encounter very often with the adoption of CDI (at
least in France) is investment done in Spring. So if we want to facilitate the adoption
we have to provide a Bridge with Spring to allow devs to integrate the "de facto
standard" in the "official standard".
> I know that Rick Hightower and CDISource Team wrote a nice extension on the subject
(https://github.com/CDISource/cdisource) but I think such a module should be endorsed by a
company that'll provide support on it like RH.
> Seam 2 provided this Bridge so it seems normal to provide it as well in Seam 3.
> What is your opinion ?
>
> Thanks,
>
> --
> Antoine Sabot-Durand
>
> _______________________________________________
> seam-dev mailing list
> seam-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/seam-dev
--
Antoine Sabot-Durand
Manager technique
-------------------------------
Ippon Technologies
3, rue Bellanger
92300 Levallois Perret
t. 01.46.12.48.48
f. 01.46.12.48.49
p. 06.08.55.34.26
e. asd(a)ippon.fr
www.ippon.fr
4:33 p.m.
What about discussing this point with CDIDource ? Their code could be a good
base. I asked Rick if I could use it and he seemed to be very open on the
subject... I could do it, except I need time to work on... a given JSR in
which I'm supposed to be involved ;-).
Antoine
2011/6/29 Pete Muir <pmuir(a)redhat.com>
It has been discussed multiple times, but it was never delivered on.
I set
it as a requirement for Seam 3.1 when I handed over to Shane, but not sure
what has happened since.
On 29 Jun 2011, at 15:18, Antoine Sabot-Durand wrote:
> Your smiley suggest that this has been already discussed / decided. I
missed those discussion apparently. Sorry...
>
> Antoine
>
> 2011/6/29 Pete Muir <pmuir(a)redhat.com>
> Yes, we should do this :-)
>
> Marius is the owner.
>
> On 29 Jun 2011, at 14:28, Antoine Sabot-Durand wrote:
>
> > Hi Team,
> >
> > 3 weeks ago I started a consulting mission in a big Insurance company
that is Redhat / JBoss customer. They use most of Java EE 5 implementation
provided by JBoss 5 EAP except for EJB 3. No EJB because it's also a Spring
Shop. One of my missions is to help them to build their next official stack
based on JBoss EAP 6 (which should be out in January). So I try to promote
full Java EE 6 stack (with CDI and EJB 3.1) and put Spring aside as an
alternative/Legacy framework. But it won't work if they don't have a
supported solution to use their old Spring components / Knowledge in this
new stack.
> > More globally one big objection I encounter very often with the
adoption of CDI (at least in France) is investment done in Spring. So if we
want to facilitate the adoption we have to provide a Bridge with Spring to
allow devs to integrate the "de facto standard" in the "official
standard".
> > I know that Rick Hightower and CDISource Team wrote a nice extension on
the subject (https://github.com/CDISource/cdisource) but I think such a
module should be endorsed by a company that'll provide support on it like
RH.
> > Seam 2 provided this Bridge so it seems normal to provide it as well in
Seam 3.
> > What is your opinion ?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > --
> > Antoine Sabot-Durand
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > seam-dev mailing list
> > seam-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/seam-dev
>
>
>
>
> --
> Antoine Sabot-Durand
> Manager technique
> -------------------------------
> Ippon Technologies
> 3, rue Bellanger
> 92300 Levallois Perret
> t. 01.46.12.48.48
> f. 01.46.12.48.49
> p. 06.08.55.34.26
> e. asd(a)ippon.fr
> www.ippon.fr
--
Antoine Sabot-Durand
Manager technique
-------------------------------
Ippon Technologies
3, rue Bellanger
92300 Levallois Perret
t. 01.46.12.48.48
f. 01.46.12.48.49
p. 06.08.55.34.26
e. asd(a)ippon.fr
www.ippon.fr
4:35 p.m.
I like the idea, but that is Shane's call.
On 29 Jun 2011, at 15:33, Antoine Sabot-Durand wrote:
What about discussing this point with CDIDource ? Their code could be
a good base. I asked Rick if I could use it and he seemed to be very open on the
subject... I could do it, except I need time to work on... a given JSR in which I'm
supposed to be involved ;-).
Antoine
2011/6/29 Pete Muir <pmuir(a)redhat.com>
It has been discussed multiple times, but it was never delivered on. I set it as a
requirement for Seam 3.1 when I handed over to Shane, but not sure what has happened
since.
On 29 Jun 2011, at 15:18, Antoine Sabot-Durand wrote:
> Your smiley suggest that this has been already discussed / decided. I missed those
discussion apparently. Sorry...
>
> Antoine
>
> 2011/6/29 Pete Muir <pmuir(a)redhat.com>
> Yes, we should do this :-)
>
> Marius is the owner.
>
> On 29 Jun 2011, at 14:28, Antoine Sabot-Durand wrote:
>
> > Hi Team,
> >
> > 3 weeks ago I started a consulting mission in a big Insurance company that is
Redhat / JBoss customer. They use most of Java EE 5 implementation provided by JBoss 5 EAP
except for EJB 3. No EJB because it's also a Spring Shop. One of my missions is to
help them to build their next official stack based on JBoss EAP 6 (which should be out in
January). So I try to promote full Java EE 6 stack (with CDI and EJB 3.1) and put Spring
aside as an alternative/Legacy framework. But it won't work if they don't have a
supported solution to use their old Spring components / Knowledge in this new stack.
> > More globally one big objection I encounter very often with the adoption of CDI
(at least in France) is investment done in Spring. So if we want to facilitate the
adoption we have to provide a Bridge with Spring to allow devs to integrate the "de
facto standard" in the "official standard".
> > I know that Rick Hightower and CDISource Team wrote a nice extension on the
subject (https://github.com/CDISource/cdisource) but I think such a module should be
endorsed by a company that'll provide support on it like RH.
> > Seam 2 provided this Bridge so it seems normal to provide it as well in Seam
3.
> > What is your opinion ?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > --
> > Antoine Sabot-Durand
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > seam-dev mailing list
> > seam-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/seam-dev
>
>
>
>
> --
> Antoine Sabot-Durand
> Manager technique
> -------------------------------
> Ippon Technologies
> 3, rue Bellanger
> 92300 Levallois Perret
> t. 01.46.12.48.48
> f. 01.46.12.48.49
> p. 06.08.55.34.26
> e. asd(a)ippon.fr
> www.ippon.fr
--
Antoine Sabot-Durand
Manager technique
-------------------------------
Ippon Technologies
3, rue Bellanger
92300 Levallois Perret
t. 01.46.12.48.48
f. 01.46.12.48.49
p. 06.08.55.34.26
e. asd(a)ippon.fr
www.ippon.fr
5:03 p.m.
My take is to use what Rick has done. It's out there, no point in redoing it. The
other idea if you want something from Red Hat would be to talk to the SnowDrop guys and
have them do a Spring / CDI module (in keeping with the idea of the main project hosting
the integration, not Seam).
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 29, 2011, at 7:28, Antoine Sabot-Durand <antoine(a)sabot-durand.net> wrote:
Hi Team,
3 weeks ago I started a consulting mission in a big Insurance company that is Redhat /
JBoss customer. They use most of Java EE 5 implementation provided by JBoss 5 EAP except
for EJB 3. No EJB because it's also a Spring Shop. One of my missions is to help them
to build their next official stack based on JBoss EAP 6 (which should be out in January).
So I try to promote full Java EE 6 stack (with CDI and EJB 3.1) and put Spring aside as an
alternative/Legacy framework. But it won't work if they don't have a supported
solution to use their old Spring components / Knowledge in this new stack.
More globally one big objection I encounter very often with the adoption of CDI (at least
in France) is investment done in Spring. So if we want to facilitate the adoption we have
to provide a Bridge with Spring to allow devs to integrate the "de facto
standard" in the "official standard".
I know that Rick Hightower and CDISource Team wrote a nice extension on the subject
(https://github.com/CDISource/cdisource) but I think such a module should be endorsed by a
company that'll provide support on it like RH.
Seam 2 provided this Bridge so it seems normal to provide it as well in Seam 3.
What is your opinion ?
Thanks,
--
Antoine Sabot-Durand
_______________________________________________
seam-dev mailing list
seam-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/seam-dev
5:13 p.m.
Snowdrop guy(s) here :). I discussed this with Shane previously. By and large, there are
two things that you can consider for this integration:
- blanket Spring/CDI integration - this can live inside of Seam or outside (e.g Snowdrop
or something else); I started a Spring/Seam module a while ago, but never got to finalize
it properly, and there is also the CDISource stuff. Right now, I need to find a way to
combine them as I believe that the integration must go deeper than bootstrapping and
resolution by name/type: e.g. events/observers, qualifier handling etc.
- specific Seam integration - bridging Spring with Seam 3 specifically, and its various
modules - e.g. transactions, persistence, qualifiers;
My plan was to work on this (at least the Spring/CDI part) after AS7 is released -
basically in July/August. I needed to focus on supporting Snowdrop proper on AS7 first :).
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jason Porter" <lightguard.jp(a)gmail.com>
To: "Antoine Sabot-Durand" <antoine(a)sabot-durand.net>
Cc: seam-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2011 11:03:02 AM
Subject: Re: [seam-dev] Don't we need a Seam - Spring module ?
My take is to use what Rick has done. It's out there, no point
in
redoing it. The other idea if you want something from Red Hat would
be to talk to the SnowDrop guys and have them do a Spring / CDI
module (in keeping with the idea of the main project hosting the
integration, not Seam).
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 29, 2011, at 7:28, Antoine Sabot-Durand <
antoine(a)sabot-durand.net > wrote:
> Hi Team,
> 3 weeks ago I started a consulting mission in a big Insurance
> company
> that is Redhat / JBoss customer. They use most of Java EE 5
> implementation provided by JBoss 5 EAP except for EJB 3. No EJB
> because it's also a Spring Shop. One of my missions is to help them
> to build their next official stack based on JBoss EAP 6 (which
> should be out in January). So I try to promote full Java EE 6 stack
> (with CDI and EJB 3.1) and put Spring aside as an
> alternative/Legacy
> framework. But it won't work if they don't have a supported
> solution
> to use their old Spring components / Knowledge in this new stack.
> More globally one big objection I encounter very often with the
> adoption of CDI (at least in France) is investment done in Spring.
> So if we want to facilitate the adoption we have to provide a
> Bridge
> with Spring to allow devs to integrate the "de facto standard" in
> the "official standard".
> I know that Rick Hightower and CDISource Team wrote a nice
> extension
> on the subject ( https://github.com/CDISource/cdisource ) but I
> think such a module should be endorsed by a company that'll provide
> support on it like RH.
> Seam 2 provided this Bridge so it seems normal to provide it as
> well
> in Seam 3.
> What is your opinion ?
> Thanks,
> --
> Antoine Sabot-Durand
> _______________________________________________
> seam-dev mailing list
> seam-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/seam-dev
_______________________________________________
seam-dev mailing list
seam-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/seam-dev
4685
days inactive
4685
days old
7 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
Antoine Sabot-Durand -
Jason Porter -
Marius Bogoevici -
Pete Muir