JOnAS 4.1: First release for J2EE 1.4

Discussions

News: JOnAS 4.1: First release for J2EE 1.4

  1. JOnAS 4.1: First release for J2EE 1.4 (22 messages)

    ObjectWeb is proud to announce the release of JOnAS 1.4.

    ObjectWeb is proud to announce the release of JOnAS 4.1. "JOnAS 4.1 supports EJB 2.1, J2EE CA 1.5 with a JMS connector for JORAM, JACC 1.0, it embeds Tomcat 5 or Jetty 5, the J2EE management model is exposed through the MEJB. JOnAS 4.1 now integrates JOTM as transaction manager and provides a new classloader hierarchy. A lightweight database is now embedded within JOnAS, making it a ready to use application server, at least for "non db intensive" applications."

    This version also provides major bug fixes, see details in the history. It has to be noted that this version is still not J2EE Certified, the process of passing the Sun J2EE Certification is under way.

    http://jonas.objectweb.org

    JOnAS 4.1 history

    JOnAS Migration Guide

    Threaded Messages (22)

  2. Please correct this article...[ Go to top ]

    Is it JOnAS 4.1 or 1.4?
  3. Version conflict :-)[ Go to top ]

    Is it JOnAS 4.1 or 1.4?
    <br/>
    the JoNAS version is 4.1<br/>
    the J2EE version it suports is 1.4 (the last one
  4. greate job,
    JOnAS is really a good alternative against JBoss

    it has certification (for j2ee1.3) while jboss didn't pass any certification
     see: http://www.theserverside.com/reviews/matrix.tss
    it's ejb container has more performance than JBoss
     see: http://www.theserverside.com/news/thread.tss?thread_id=12698
      
    it seems more open source than professional
      open source(read commercial open source) jboss

    Pishvayi
  5. IDE Support[ Go to top ]

    Is anyone out there using an IDE that has built in or plug-in deployment descriptor support for Jonas? I would love to start it at our company without deployment support from some IDE. Currently we use Eclipse and JDeveloper.

    Thanks,
  6. Fix[ Go to top ]

    I mean to say "I would love to start using it at our company, but will not be able to without deployment support from some IDE." Our current J2EE programmers are a little over their heads as it is, and I would like to keep our development as simple as possible.
  7. Fix[ Go to top ]

    Have a look at Lomboz - its a plugin for Eclipse
  8. Fix[ Go to top ]

    You could try the Jope-Plugin for Eclipse. It creates deployment-descriptors (standard and jonas-specific ones) and allows to start, stop and debug your JOnAS Server. More features are added.
  9. IDE support for JOnAS[ Go to top ]

    JOnAS 4.1 is still to new for most of the IDE plugins to be supported yet, but that's probably just a question of time. Here's a list:

    JOPE plugin for eclipse.

    Kelly OpenTool for JBuilder (even the EJB Designer works).

    Lomboz plugin for eclipse tries to be a complete J2EE extension for eclipse and supports JOnAS too.

    MyEclipse is a commercial offering and a very polished collection of eclipse plugins for J2EE development with JOnAS support.
  10. Fix[ Go to top ]

    I mean to say "I would love to start using it at our company, but will not be able to without deployment support from some IDE." Our current J2EE programmers are a little over their heads as it is, and I would like to keep our development as simple as possible.
    If you want my advice, I would suggest that you standardized away from IDE plugins and used tools like xdoclet with ant to generate deployment descriptors (and even the EJB interfaces if you are into the EJB thing).

    These wonderful, magical, app server integration plugins for IDE are just absolute sweetness.....then..... something goes wrong ;o). A bug in the plugin corrupts the deployment descriptor getting the attributes slightly wrong etc etc etc, suddenly, nobody knows what the hell is going on.

    Your current J2EE developers are in over their heads because they are being insulated from the technology. This is not good for them or you.

    Why not pick one (the brightest) and get them to start working on being less 'in over his/her head'. It is amazing how quick knowledge can propogate on a team (unless too many people have ego issues).

    By actually understanding what is happening your developers will be able to fix bugs and understand performance issues. This will benefit their skills and the quality of your software for the price of a slight hit on productivity for a short time.

    Just my 2 cents.
  11. Use EJOSA[ Go to top ]

    <wesley>
    If you want my advice, I would suggest that you standardized away from IDE plugins and used tools like xdoclet with ant to generate deployment descriptors (and even the EJB interfaces if you are into the EJB thing).
    </wesley>

    Agree with you. Especially if we need to develop a big system. No chance without Ant :-) But therefore we provide EJOSA Template (Enterprise Java Open Source Architecture == Enhydra and/or JOnAS Application). The EJOSA 2.0 Revo supports JOnAS 3.3.6, also AndroMDA on the top. But you can customize EJOSA for your need and JOnAS 4.1.

    Documentation EJOSA 2.0 Revo:
    http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/ejosa/ejosa-revo-doc.pdf?download

    Site:
    http://ejosa.sourceforge.net

    Download:
    http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=69075&package_id=83592&release_id=233272

    News about EJOSA 2.0 at TSS:
    http://www.theserverside.com/news/thread.tss?thread_id=25957

    Have fun!
    Lofi.

    BTW., we (OpenUSS Team) love JOnAS, Enhydra because of their simplicity and very good documentation (especially for J2EE beginners)... But we also like Hibernate, XDoclet and surely those Apache products (Ant, ...). Great job to all contributors to make Enterprise Java Open Source possible.
  12. The JCA stuff is still immature. It requires a "jonas-ra.xml" inside the RAR archieve. That's not what the doctor ordered. We don't want to have a special rar version for Jonas so forget it.

    Even if I add jonas-ra.xml to our rar, the deployment fails. It seems they did their test only with Joram.

    I'm so tired of these open source dudes. All major app server vendors, IBM, BEA, Oracle, Sun, and also Caucho with Resin were very keen to test our JCA RA to make their product better. They did provide us excellent support and both sides were able to fix a bunch of bugs. But forget the open source crap like Jonas or Geronimo.

    -- Andreas (SwiftMQ)
  13. Well.. it have nothing to do with open source software..

    If you get inquiry a bit more, you will see that jonas team can provide a wonderfl support even to integrate ur products...

    for example redhat is having a grea help porting JOnAS to GCJ.

    Inquiry.
  14. I did ask and even had a short mail exchange with one Jonas guy. But that was it. No one from Geronimo ever replied on my offer to test JMS JCA integration. The last think I did was to leave a note in their wiki.

    So don't tell me that they provide great support.

    Anyway, we will not test it anymore, even if they are willing to test. Live is too short for this.

    -- Andreas
  15. Hello Andreas,

    Specific descriptor is the usual way to specify server specific infos.
    JOnAS JCA support has of course been validated JORAM, but we will be happy to validate it with SwiftMQ if you report the problems your have on the jonas mailing list, rather than flaming...
  16. Andreas,

    > The JCA stuff is still immature. It requires a "jonas-ra.xml"
    > inside the RAR archieve. That's not what the doctor ordered.

    In my experience, this is fairly typical. I've seen wls-ra.xml files for example and similar approaches in other products.

    A major objective of the J2EE Connector Architecture is to eliminate the need for app server vendors to qualify their products with every flavor of connector. Using standard interfaces allows (in theory) any RA to operate with and App Server. Unfortunately, J2EE CA leaves configuration details to the individual product vendors, and as a result you have to provide something like jonas-ra.xml to deal with deployment issues on different app servers.

    If the current implementation is not convenient enough, perhaps you could send email to the JOnAS mailing list and suggest an alternative that achieves the objectives of jonas-ra.xml. The JOnAS developers are very open to suggestions, and as long as the suggestion is technically possible and does not violate J2EE standards, I'm sure it would receive consideration.

    > All major app server vendors, IBM, BEA, Oracle, Sun, and
    > also Caucho with Resin were very keen to test our JCA RA
    > to make their product better.

    I'm not familiar with the problems you had. Did you raise your issues on the jonas mailing list? I'm surprised you were not able to obtain the help needed to deploy your connector.
  17. In my experience, this is fairly typical. I've seen wls-ra.xml files for example and similar approaches in other products.A major objective of the J2EE Connector Architecture is ...
    Seems you are not up to date. I'm talking about JCA 1.5, not 1.0. In 1.0 it is usual to have an app server specific xxx-ra.xml. This was eliminated in 1.5. Check section 17, especially 17.2 "RAR contents" to see what is required. The RA provider provides the ra.xml with meta infos on which base the configuration will be created during deployment. Other app servers are doing it that way, except Jonas because they don't read the spec. Result is that a RA provider (or user!) has to unpack its rar to add this silly jonas-ra.xml.
    Did you raise your issues on the jonas mailing list? I'm surprised you were not able to obtain the help needed to deploy your connector.
    I postedan offer to integrate the RA in January. Anyway, there is no need to discuss this further. We are not interested anymore (and left Objectweb as well).

    EOD.

    -- Andreas
  18. Oh dear, Andreas, your attitude really is cute. So you did ask on their mailing list back in January if someone wanted to test your precious JCA 1.5 compatible RA and didn't get the expected responses. And now you are acting like a spoiled child, with a hurt ego, probably investing more time on your flames here than you did on making contact with the JOnAS guys before.

    Guess what, it is you who is trying to sell a commercial product to JOnAS users, and not the other way around.
  19. Oh dear, Andreas, your attitude really is cute. So you did ask on their mailing list back in January if someone wanted to test your precious JCA 1.5 compatible RA and didn't get the expected responses. And now you are acting like a spoiled child, with a hurt ego, probably investing more time on your flames here than you did on making contact with the JOnAS guys before.
    You mean my begging wasn't enough? I think you misunderstand some things here, Tevo. I responded on an announcement about a JCA 1.5 implementation and my intention was to show that they are not interested to test their JCA 1.5 hooks. Neither Jonas nor Geronimo. All they do is to test with their own crap to release as early as possible to make noise since they are in competition with Geronimo and JBoss.
    Guess what, it is you who is trying to sell a commercial product to JOnAS users, and not the other way around.
    That's the typical attitude of an open source bunny. I can tell you that my intention was not to sell SwiftMQ to Jonas users. Jonas is not very popular and SwiftMQ's support in the past as well as our [already terminated] corporate membership at Objectweb was more of an idealistic nature.

    My intention was to increase the quality of our resource adapter and to give Objectweb the chance to increase the quality of Jonas' JCA 1.5 hook. That's all. Obviously all other commercial app server vendors understood this and worked with us and at the end everybody was happy. Only the open source app server dudes were not interested. I really don't understand why. Really. Are they simply jealous and have fear that someone might use another JMS impl with their app server? But JCA 1.5 is about JMS pluggability! This is one intention of the spec!

    -- Andreas
  20. I responded on an announcement about a JCA 1.5 implementation and my intention was to show that they are not interested to test their JCA 1.5 hooks. Neither Jonas nor Geronimo.
    So you admit your intention wasn't about working with the "open source bunnies" to improve theirs or your product but rather to give you amunition for your FUD. I think I start to understand why someone might choose to not accept your generous offer ;o)
  21. So you admit your intention wasn't about working with the "open source bunnies" to improve theirs or your product but rather to give you amunition for your FUD. I think I start to understand why someone might choose to not accept your generous offer ;o)
    Ahh ... understood. You mean that I wrote the letter in Jan with the idea in mind that if I don't get an answer (hopefully!) then I will spread FUD about them in every forum? How clever, wow!

    But no, sorry, I'm not that clever.

    Have a nice day.

    -- Andreas
  22. [rant]
    That's the typical attitude of an open source bunny. I can tell you that my intention was not to sell SwiftMQ to Jonas users. Jonas is not very popular and SwiftMQ's support in the past as well as our [already terminated] corporate membership at Objectweb was more of an idealistic nature.[rant]-- Andreas
    Andreas, what's the whole point here ?

    Beside displaying exceptionnaly discourteous manners, what's the point in publicly (and unfairly) thrashing your peers?

    The whole idea behind open-source is that everybody, including YOU can contribute. Please do : contribute to JOnAS and help the team make JOnAS yet a better project.

    Source code is open ; you know better than anybody else your (close source) product. You can make JOnAS work with SwiftMQ -- as long as it's your real intent.
  23. I postedan offer to integrate the RA in January. Anyway, there is no need to discuss this further. We are not interested anymore (and left Objectweb as well).EOD.-- Andreas
    The offer has been answered in a positive way:
    Hi Andreas,

    thank for your proposal for testing your JCA 1.5 RA ! I will let Eric (who is
    the leader in the development of JOnAS JCA 1.5 support) answer you in more
    details. But I think he should have something available by the end of the month or beginning of next month, and I figure out that he could be very interested to test your connector ...
    So. What's the problem here? Lack of patience, that's it?

    The buddies developping JOnAS spend more time coding than answering TSS trolls, and I think they make the right choice. However, I cannot let blatant disinformation be posted here without proper denial.

    ObjectWeb is a community where goodwill and a sense of respect are praised values. I can fully understand that someone with different ways may prefer to leave.