juneau-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Craig Russell <craig.russ...@oracle.com>
Subject Re: Does Hammock + Juneau make sense?
Date Thu, 30 Jun 2016 14:24:20 GMT
Was that a typo?

You want to wait until the donation is complete even though you know that it might drag out
for a while?

Or is “I’d personally NOT wait…”

Seems like this might be a good thing to start discussing.

Thanks,

Craig

> On Jun 30, 2016, at 7:18 AM, James Bognar <james.bognar@salesforce.com> wrote:
> 
> I'd personally wait until the IBM donation is complete.  I'm concerned that
> might drag out for a while.
> 
> On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 10:10 AM, John D. Ament <johndament@apache.org>
> wrote:
> 
>> Hi James,
>> 
>> On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 9:51 AM James Bognar <james.bognar@salesforce.com>
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi John,
>>> 
>>> Would that be a merge of the microservice APIs?
>>> 
>> 
>> Yes, I believe so.
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> The Juneau Microservice API is the least mature part of the project.  It
>>> was developed less than a year ago as part of IBMs move to push Rational
>>> Team Concert into cloud deployments.  The microservices provided
>>> lightweight Jetty-based REST interfaces for communications within the
>>> various cloud components.
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Similarly, Hammock provides Jetty integration, in addition to Undertow.  I
>> would like to add Tomcat to that list.  It uses JAX-RS for rest, but I
>> would like to expand that to support more tools, and wouldn't mind if we
>> built something.
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> I'm not entirely sure the Microservice API is in it's final form.  As it
>>> developed, I noticed I was essentially reimplementing aspects of OSGi.
>> I'm
>>> now thinking that it makes sense to convert it into an actual OSGi
>>> Application.  I'd have to do some testing to see how "lightweight" an
>>> OSGi-based approach could be.
>>> 
>> 
>> OSGi makes me cringe.  I would actually prefer we didn't look at OSGi short
>> term, but thats my own preference.
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> I think we should consider the Microservice API to be "beta" and the
>>> architecture flexible.  So I'm totally open to discussions on changes to
>>> the API.
>>> 
>> 
>> I'm glad to hear this.  Would it make sense for me to start thinking about
>> an SGA, or would it make sense for the IBM donation to start and see where
>> there's potential synergy?
>> 
>> John
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 6:42 PM, John D. Ament <johndament@apache.org>
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Similar in spirit to Craig's recent email.  I'm wondering if it makes
>>> sense
>>>> to consider integrating, or even donation of, Hammock w/ Juneau.
>>>> 
>>>> https://github.com/johnament/hammock
>>>> 
>>>> Basically, I started Hammock > 2 years ago first conceptually as a way
>> to
>>>> tie in the CDI model w/ a TCP server like Netty.  I was able to build
>> out
>>>> some extensions w/ Resteasy and got a working prototype together.  I've
>>>> done some refinement, dropped Netty (not for any specific reason other
>>> than
>>>> HTTP all the things) and gotten it working for some basic use cases.  I
>>>> also ended up doing a JavaOne presentation on it.
>>>> 
>>>> There was a recent discussion w/ a software vendor to fold it into
>> their
>>>> portfolio.  Turns out the person I was speaking with wasn't actually in
>>> any
>>>> authority to do so, so while some public donations have occurred, no
>>> formal
>>>> convergence has happened.  So I still own the code.
>>>> 
>>>> Now I'm wondering if it makes sense to somehow work Hammock and Juneau
>>>> together.  Hammock is basically microservices on the CDI stack.  It was
>>>> always intended for smaller deployments, SE based bootstrapping for a
>>>> container that launched some internal services (DB connections, servlet
>>>> containers, etc).  Is there some potential synergy here?
>>>> 
>>>> John
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> James Bognar
>>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> James Bognar

Craig L Russell
Architect
craig.russell@oracle.com
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!






Mime
View raw message