Thanks for sharing your comments and observations. More inline...
On 7/24/13 12:09 PM, David M. Lloyd wrote:
> On initial review of JBeret we have noticed a number of issues that need to be
addressed. The culmination amounts to a series of questions and observations here:
>
> #1) Why did we not choose to just use the RI? In other words, what benefit do we get
from JBeret that is not also in the RI? In other, other words, why should we *use* this
code instead of the RI at this point in time?
Batch RI (
http://java.net/projects/jbatch from IBM) was created solely for the purpose of
a reference implementation, and is a subset of IBM's batch offering. The RI code base
is refreshed periodically by IBM contributors and it doesn't seem to open to community
contribution. I haven't done a deep technical comparison between the 2 yet, but I
guess there are areas that one is better than the other and vise versa. Looking a bit
longer term, batch has been an area Java EE and JBoss haven't paid much attention to,
and I believe is an area that can offer future growth potential. Having our own impl
would give us more flexibility when it comes to integration with the rest of the stack,
design choices, and community building. I'm also adding Kev and Pete for their
perspectives.
IIRC Jason G was keen that we build a batch impl, rather than reuse the RI. I can't
remember his reasoning.