[lsb-discuss] Java

Dallman, John jgd at ugs.com
Fri Feb 1 02:32:47 PST 2008


Thorsten Kukuk wrote: 
> On Thu, Jan 31, George Kraft wrote:
> > Secondly, is Java relevant any longer?  Are new applications 
> > that would have been written in Java are now being written in 
> > Web 2.0/AJAX or Eclipse?

Java is much less used for web page applets than it used to be.
But it has major applications in "enterprise apps" because Java 
EE (formerly J2EE) is very good for writing distributed multi-
layer applications. The server side of Java EE handles failovers,
load balancing, thread pools, et al, really quite well. So there 
are a lot of in-house systems that work this way, and some 
commercially distributed apps. My employers produce some of the 
latter, though I don't work on them and don't know much detail.
But they get used on Linux servers, and Linux clients. 

> My suggestion is, before the JVM situation especially on the
> non-mainstream architectures does not become better, LSB should
> not mention Java.

I'd say LSB should not require Java or specify its features in any 
detail. There is scope for encouraging people who produce JREs to 
make them LSB-compliant. 

-- 
John Dallman
Parasolid Porting Engineer

Siemens PLM Software
46 Regent Street, Cambridge, CB2 1DP
United Kingdom
Tel: +44-1223-371554
john.dallman at siemens.com
www.siemens.com/plm
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: lsb-discuss-bounces at lists.linux-foundation.org 
> [mailto:lsb-discuss-bounces at lists.linux-foundation.org] On 
> Behalf Of Thorsten Kukuk
> Sent: Friday, February 01, 2008 9:49 AM
> To: lsb-discuss at lists.linux-foundation.org
> Subject: Re: [lsb-discuss] Java
> 
> On Thu, Jan 31, George Kraft wrote:
> 
> > I'm still of the opinion that the LSB should not specify the Java
> > language and/or runtime.  Java is Sun's product and they 
> have their own
> > certification programs.  However, the LSB should certify 
> JNIs and JREs
> > as LSB applications.
> > 
> > Secondly, is Java relevant any longer?  Are new 
> applications that would
> > have been written in Java are now being written in Web 2.0/AJAX or
> > Eclipse?
> > 
> > Lastly, would it be sufficient for the GNU/Linux community 
> to endorse a
> > single open source Java provider?
> 
> I know from quite some in house projects which are using Java.
> We tried hard to get all the projects unified in a way, that they
> would run with the default system Java. We failed. The one appliction
> urgently needed some enhancements of IBM Java not (yet?) available
> from Sun, the other one should run on all hardware, but there was
> not a single Java version which is supported on all architectures
> (only look at IA64, which is a LSB architecture).
> In the end, all applications are still bundled with a special Java
> version and don't use the system wide Java.
> 
> >From that experience, I would say:
> 
> LSB can define the real core of Java available with every Java 
> implementation for every architecture. But no ISV will use that,
> since the functionalty they need will not be there.
> 
> My suggestion is, before the JVM situation especially on the
> non-mainstream architectures does not become better, LSB should
> not mention Java.
> 
>   Thorsten
> 
> -- 
> Thorsten Kukuk, Project Manager/Release Manager SLES
> SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, D-90409 Nuernberg
> GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nuernberg)
> _______________________________________________
> lsb-discuss mailing list
> lsb-discuss at lists.linux-foundation.org
> https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/lsb-discuss
> This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential 
> and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity 
> to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email 
> in error please notify the system manager. This message 
> contains confidential information and is intended only for 
> the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you 
> should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail.
> 
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail.




More information about the lsb-discuss mailing list