First of all I'd like to say "Welcome, Wolfgang, to our community!"
Yes, we where talking with Wolfgang even before we submit our proposal
to Eclipse, and I appreciate Wolfgang's commitment to drive new and
exciting ideas to Java community.
I'd like to admit that I agree with Ed - I like the word RSP and,
honestly, we where talking about that naming internally here, in Exadel,
a few months ago, Wolfgang just was lucky enough to "hijack" the word in
his article on theserverside (Wolfgang, please, no offense!). The word
"RSP" have both - pros and contras, in my understanding.
In reality we are talking about "just" platform. We really need to span
between both - client and server sides and we need really simple way to
span applications between different levels. But why just both? What
about data tier? In ECP (let me use that word for the lack of better one
so far) we where talking about ability to put some database artifacts
into bundles, and why we cannot puts anything there, like stored
procedures, DDL, sample or static data etc? So, some components belong
to client, so to the server, some to the database tier.
What about grid infrastructure? Some of our components may be deployed
to some nodes on grid to perform specific node-dependent functions.
What about application life cycle? Our components may have full
design-time artifact inside (code, build scripts, documentation, tests
etc.).
In all this cases we need (definition of) components, dependencies,
assembly, distribution etc, what essentially we all are talking about
here. So, we have to address all tiers!
I support Wendell's idea to organize several groups specialized on some
aspects of our ambitious plans, but first we need to pass project review
in Eclipse and start actual work rather sooner, than later.
Back to the subject: I like RSP for the simplicity, but nether RSP, nor
ECP are definitive enough, I think. I do not care as much about name, as
about specific functionality that we are going to implement. And I think
we will continue our dialog with Wolfgang's group.
Our next step will be Project Review in a few weeks, I'm working on
presentation right now, as soon as I will have it I will post it here
and, if somebody would like to listen, I will held a conference call.
Best,
Igor.
Wendell Beckwith wrote:
Guys, there is only so many hours in a day, approximately 37.4 based
on my last project schedule, to actually work on an open source
project. Wolfgang, if your work could be considered a sub-project for
a specific domain of this project then it would be better for all
involved IMHO. I'm not asking you to abandon your idea for a project,
but instead to ask can I carve out my niche in a existing (or soon to
exist) project. If you look at the people who have shown interest
there might be 10+ committers for this project, of which 2 might be
yourself and Scott Lewis working on an RSP-UI component. No one has
talked about organization, but there may be a core team and then a lot
of domain specific components, similar in nature to the Apache Commons
project and the component libraries included within it.
Wendell
Wolfgang Gehner wrote:
The RSP-UI proposal which Ed refers to is not published/submitted
yet, so it's kinda hard to discuss in public. Hope to get it out
there soon, though.
Only so much, there is good communication with ECP (including
exchange of pre-proposal drafts), agreement to collaborate, and
having integration points between ECP and RSP-UI.
On ECF/OSGi console, Scott Lewis has confirmed interest to support
and possibly contribute to RSP-UI, most likely through ECF
usage/feedback.
Wolfgang Gehner
Ed Burnette wrote:
1. The RSP idea doesn't have to be tied to JEE. In fact I think
that's a bad idea and said so in my comments on the RSP proposal.
2. It shouldn't use legacy of Eclipse 2 unless there's some good
reason to.
3. RSP is not a trademark. The '(tm)' thing was just a joke on
Wolfgang's part (I just asked him).
4. Rich Client Platform is well known. Changing 'client' to 'server'
just capitalizes on name recognition to quickly explain it, kind of
like the term 'cable modem'.
You guys (you and Wolfgang and maybe Jeff McAffer) should really talk.
I don't have any skin in this but I think Eclipse needs something
really low level, simple, and flexible to serve as a legacy-free
framework for server applications of the future. Namely, equinox on
the server, with dynamic bundles and services and all that implies.
See also my 'grand challenges' talk at EclipseCon, and the neat
ECF/OSGi console that Scott Lewis did.
Alex Antonau wrote:
We familiar with the Rich Server Platform but there are essential
differences:
1. RSP is just a plug-in system for JEE container
2. RSP uses legacy of Eclipse 2 ? Eclipse extension points
3. RSP name is a trademark
> 4. "Rich" is not commonly used term in
enterprise application development and could arise questions
Alex Antonau