Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Apache Launches a J2EE Project

michael posted more than 11 years ago | from the one-lump-or-two dept.

Java 40

gstein writes "The ASF has announced the launch of the "Geronimo" project. Geronimo will be an Apache-licensed implementation of the Java J2EE specification; further, the ASF is committed to getting it certified as J2EE-compliant. The project is looking for developers interested in helping to carry this ambitious effort forward. See the original invitation that was sent out to many J2EE communities."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Geronimo !!!!! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6618434)

All I can say is, hope they have a parachute

Another original project (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6618435)

It's great to see another original Open Source project rather then one that just duplicates a commercial product.

Seems like a good idea (5, Interesting)

Arkham (10779) | more than 11 years ago | (#6618517)

J2EE is a very complex standard. Of the J2EE containers that I have used (WebLogic, JBoss, and Resin), only Resin actually seems easy to set up and use. WebLogic is very powerful, but the learning curve is steep.

It would be nice to see a complete, certified J2EE implementation that's as straightforward to use as Tomcat.

Maybe I should join the effort. Maybe you should too :)

Re:Seems like a good idea (4, Insightful)

amorico (40859) | more than 11 years ago | (#6619132)

<sarcasm> Ooh, maybe it will be as fast and stable as Tomcat </sarcasm>.

Anyone who has tried to use freeroller can tell you how stellar the combination of struts and tomcat is.

What will be interesting is to see how it stacks up against JBoss and Jonas the other Open Source application servers. At this point, however, it is vapor, though Jakarta does have an excellent and deserved reputation for follow-up and completion. I use many of their components (which is why I have complaints ;)

The reason the J2EE learning curve is so steep is because the learning curve for transaction oriented distributed computing is steep. J2EE makes it easi-er, but not easy by any stretch of my tortured imagination. There is no wizard that can tell you how to scale and plan your architecture given your usage environment. Most people do it with a mixture of experience, best practices, and prayer.

Still, the more the merrier and the apache license will be very conducive to the constituent components of this server being used elsewhere. At the very least there will be more people to pray with over deployments.

Tomcat IS stable ! Vive Schroedinger ;-) (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6624214)

Ok, we all know it is not very performant compare to other servlet container, but things are getting improved with the latest releases.

But about the stability, i've pushed tomcat on some big servers since years without having any kind of problem.

If well parametrized, there is no issue for a single instance to handle more than 200 connections at the same time. This is quite enough for most people server requirements !

Bu the way did you heard about schroedinger [] , a nice packaging that ease the setup of tomcat for developement machines ?

Pretty nice and simple, also have a zeroconf (aka rendezvous) discovery feature. Only missing is a webstart link :(

Re:Tomcat IS stable ! Vive Schroedinger ;-) (1)

the_duke_of_hazzard (603473) | more than 11 years ago | (#6666066)

I/We beg to differ. Using Tomcat has been nightmarish for us to deploy on reasonably small, simple sites. Specifically, enormous problems with mod_jk and inconsistencies between apparently similar version of TC causing utter havoc. We switched to Resin in the end...

Re:Seems like a good idea (1)

bmj (230572) | more than 11 years ago | (#6627964)

Hopefully the project will be run like the Tomcat project, and not like several of the other Jakarta subprojects. I use many of the smaller projects in an application now, and while the technology is good, the project management is terrible.

Re:Seems like a good idea (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6626426)

Checkout orion ( .. kickbutt container... oracles OC4j/OAS is based on orion...

Re:Seems like a good idea (1)

Clay Mitchell (43630) | more than 11 years ago | (#6652626)

Orion is *exceptionally* easy to set up and get running. Good documentation too. Resin is behind on it's 3.0 docs (though 3.0 hasn't been official released iirc)

[OT] Usage of "Steep Learning Curve" (1)

hackrobat (467625) | more than 11 years ago | (#6626603)

FYI "steep learning curve" in psychology means that it's easy to learn. Au contraire, in engineering, it means it's difficult to learn. This is due to the different ways the time-knowledge graph can be drawn vis-a-vis the X and Y axes.

Re:Seems like a good idea (1)

simonettaj (698359) | more than 11 years ago | (#6702278)

Yes well any architecture of this nature is complex but once understood is quite simple. Taking the problem and coming up with the correct architecture using J2EE is much harder than understanding how J2EE works. Anyway JBOSS is not Sun Certified yet

Helpful link (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6618570)

Free J2EE implementation here! []

Re:Helpful link (2, Informative)

durdur (252098) | more than 11 years ago | (#6628356)

Huh? There is a Sun reference implemention of J2EE, but if you read the license you will realize it's not free software: you don't get rights to modify it or redistribute it. You can get the source code, but there is a separate, complex license for that. Also, it is explicitly not licensed for commercial use. You can't run a business off it. Finally, it is also not intended to be fast or stable: it is built for correctness, not performance (although they don't even do the correctness part very well: there are bugs).

Re:Free as Free Speech... (1)

Glasswire (302197) | more than 11 years ago | (#6630617)

not Free Beer that Sun gives away.

What about JBoss? (4, Insightful)

bornholtz (94540) | more than 11 years ago | (#6618993)

I'm all for the Apache project and use many of their projects in my own open source project. However, the J2EE spec is *HUGE*. JBoss is already an Open Source implementation. Might it be a better effort to contribute and make JBoss stronger?

Re:What about JBoss? (5, Informative)

sircrown (82531) | more than 11 years ago | (#6620005)

For one thing, JBoss is under the LGPL and if I'm not mistaken Apache projects only use code released under the Apache Software License (ASL) or other suitably compatible license such as MPL or BSD.

Secondly, a lot of people seem to have objections over how the JBoss Group (allegedly) runs its business. Enough so as to stop them from using the product.

Re:What about JBoss? (1)

witchcraft_in (695598) | more than 11 years ago | (#6623953)

Ya, I too have the feeling like putting my hand into mud whenever i try or recommend people to use JBoss for J2EE, I am for Apache.

Don't spread FUD (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6638870)

The issue with the Apache licence is valid but the "how JBoss is run" is pure FUD.

If you don't like how the current maintainers of open source run it, fork the project. That's the power of open source. That's what happened with GCC and it became better because of the fork.

Re:What about JBoss? (1, Informative)

sporty (27564) | more than 11 years ago | (#6620729)

JBoss, unfortunately, is a bit of a bear to use. Just what I've learned through the frustrations of others.

Re:What about JBoss? (1, Funny)

Hard_Code (49548) | more than 11 years ago | (#6622954)

Yeah, Apache should help usability</sarcasm> ;)

Re:What about JBoss? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6620773)

yeah, why don't we all quit our jobs and join JBoss!

didn't you hear? they kick out all the developers who won't join their company now. jboss isn't an open source project. it's freeware.

and i'm supposed to be excited about jboss? no way, jose. i don't care if Geronimo *is* vaporware. they got monson-haefel and the OpenEJB guys over at Geronimo. monson-haefel wrote the book on ejb, and i'm pretty sure Apache wouldn't announce a project like this without a plan.

Re:What about JBoss? (2, Funny)

liloldme (593606) | more than 11 years ago | (#6627384)

Open source is a license, ok? Open source is not a business model, it is not code of ethics, and it is not your morals. And it does not give you blow jobs.


Re:What about JBoss? (1)

coene (554338) | more than 11 years ago | (#6681713)

Open source is NOT a license.

"The BSD License" is a license, the GPL, LGPL, and "Apache License" are licenses.

Open Source is the ability for anyone, or at least those not excluded by some other clause, to be able to view the code, documentation, notes, and related materials of a project or undertaking.

And what do you mean no blowjobs? Pssh...

Re:What about JBoss? (1)

liloldme (593606) | more than 11 years ago | (#6684003)

Open Source Definition []

Hope it helps.

Re:What about JBoss? (1)

ProfKyne (149971) | more than 11 years ago | (#6666747)

JBoss is already an Open Source implementation. Might it be a better effort to contribute and make JBoss stronger?

Yes, it would. However, the license used by Apache projects is less restrictive than the LGPL that is used in JBoss licensing. Also, many of the developers who are most interested in pushing Geronimo out of the incubator are actually former committers on the JBoss project. There is some bad blood [] on this issue, and it does not look like JBoss Group is interested in letting these people be committers to both the Apache project and the JBoss project.

This was certainly expected... (1)

Manos Batsis (608014) | more than 11 years ago | (#6624284) SUN's stuff usually feature Apache code inside (including the current J2EE RI and Application Server). It's only logical for SUN to push development of the complete application server to Apache, as it has been doing with many other code bases of it's products. Using an open source group to develop stuff reduces costs (SUN is not the only one doing this, see IBM with the Eclipse/Websphere studio for another example).

The benefit is for everyone as we gain access to more OS code. Then again, SCO may claim it owns certain Apache code fragments...

Advantage over JBoss (4, Insightful)

oops (41598) | more than 11 years ago | (#6624665)

The advantage that this could have over JBoss is the potential for certification as a J2EE container.

JBoss have spent ages negotiating with Sun over the costs of certification, whereas Apache (as a registered charity) aren't eligible for the certification fee.

I'm not making a case for certification, but for some people this is a big deal.

Re:Advantage over JBoss (4, Informative)

NateTheGreat (151549) | more than 11 years ago | (#6625423)

It looks like this is in the works now. From Marc Fleury's July 2003 news, which went out last night:
JBoss is increasingly used in production and as you all move to production we realize that certification brand becomes an important check mark. We have the financials to take it on, so we are. So many people have asked us where that was at and the press is having a field day with the story. It seems everyone likes drama. So there is no drama at least not anymore on our side. For all intents and purposes, JBoss has agreed to ALL the conditions imposed by SUN. It includes what for us is a hefty sum of money. They didn't give us a break, they didn't give us any break, which is kind of normal if you think about it as there are many parties involved and SUN must treat all licensees the same. In short the ball is in SUN's court and we are looking forward to inking the contract.
Let's hope it goes quickly so we can move on. Personally, I don't really care whether it has certification. I already know that it does what I need. However, this will provide the necessary ammo to get JBoss in the door in a few places. The really great thing about JBoss is J2EE is just a feature of the system. There are so many cool features that go beyond J2EE. I highly encourage everyone to check it out!

Re:J2EE Certification--Apache and JBoss (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6625425)

According to some interviews in the media posted on their website, JBoss is ready to accept Sun's certification conditions and pay up. Sun cannot arbitrarily exclude JBoss from certification and allow Apache to certify. JBoss has accepted Sun's fee and conditions. A certification mark is not a country club. Arbritrariness makes it legally invlalid.

JBoss will be certified soon (really!) (3, Interesting)

Rescate (688702) | more than 11 years ago | (#6625469)

Don't know if you saw this discussion [] over in the Developers section. Looks like JBoss is finally making a concerted effort to move ahead with certification.

JBoss will be certified long before Apache's J2EE is finished, so Apache won't have the advantage of being the only open-source J2EE implementation.

However, I still think Apache's J2EE does have one big advantage--the Apache license. As others have pointed out, this could mean that we'll see Apache's J2EE code popping up in other vendors' products, ala Apache web server. This could strengthen Apache's position in the business world in a way that JBoss can't compete with.

R.I.P Virgin Apache (2, Funny)

risk-dev (246265) | more than 11 years ago | (#6626523)

With this story, the "Virgin Apache hard to find" story has officially been dropped off of the apache mini-page at the top right corner of slashdot, it will be missed.

Mod me OT, but... (2)

Jellybob (597204) | more than 11 years ago | (#6629245)

Who decided that white on black was the right colour combination for one of the biggest mailing list archives out there?

Did someone really sit down and say "Hey, we're building a site where people are gonna sit and read large ammounts of text. How about we choose the worst combination of colours for long term reading known to man."

Re:Mod me OT, but... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6629658)

Who chose white on black for the CLI?

Re:Mod me OT, but... (1)

cant_get_a_good_nick (172131) | more than 11 years ago | (#6650298)

I agree that it's bad, but not "worst".. methinks blue text on red background is worse. And I've actually seen that; man they shoulda chipped in for the aspirin my headache called for.

launch of Apache?s Geronimo -good news indeed (5, Interesting)

Miguel de Icaza (660439) | more than 11 years ago | (#6636602)

Project ELBA [] has the best summary ever:
ELBA is an interim but production ready enterprise application server written in Java. The goal of the ELBA project is to die by having all of its functionality replaced by the Apache Geronimo project.

apparently marc flowery is chomping over this. He has been flaming [] everyone all over the place, calling the people running appache hypocrites [] , pulling CVS write privalages from core [] jboss developers, and trying to make out the LGPL has some kind of mystical closed source properties [] that no-one else can posibly understand or explain!
ha! how much do i loathe flowery, how i laughed as i downloaded from kazza, now his empire is crumbling around him...

this puppy is gonna run and run!

Speaking of which... (1)

calennert (654624) | more than 11 years ago | (#6639338)

Someone [] is feeling a little bitter.

Re:launch of Apache?s Geronimo -good news indeed (1)

liloldme (593606) | more than 11 years ago | (#6640615)

Hmm, I didn't see any flames there considering some of the things he has said in the past ;-) He is right about submitting LGPL'd code under Apache license, if it is done by someone who does not own the copyright to the code it is a clear license violation. Nothing mystical or closed source about that. A visit to FSF [] will help, even a ranting lunatic like yourself.


Try JONAS! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6718978)

Do you check for Jonas?

We are using from version 2.4.x and the new version 3.2 is wonderfull. It's easy to set up, fast and very stable.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?