According to Infoworld, JBoss Application Server 4.0 is going to be released today. The full version of JBoss AS 4 is certified as compatible with the J2EE 1.4 platform. With a production release coming, it will be interesting to see how much use the AO functionality gets from the community.

JBoss ships J2EE 1.4-compliant open source app server

Congratulations and many thanks to all the people who have participated in its development. I will be glad to use it for my next projects.

i will digging into it right away. will possible use it in the next release of my project.

i will digging into it right away. will possible use it in the next release of my project.

... and i am the very first person to download it! wow!

really that was a very good effort

the best news recently.

Excellent news - congrats JBoss team!
   Scott

I'd be interested in finding out exactly how "mission critical" the applications are that people are considering deploying.

Personally, I think I'd wait until the first patch release at least.

Anyway, good job.

Matt Youill
betfair.com

Personally, I think I'd wait until the first patch release at least.Anyway, good job.Matt Youillbetfair.com

I personaly think that popular open-source software is better tested than most non open-source (how many of these don't even have unit tests ?). Of course, I always download the source code : it helps if something doesn't work or if I want a deeper look into a new feature.

I personaly think that popular open-source software is better tested than most non open-source (how many of these don't even have unit tests ?). Of course, I always download the source code : it helps if something doesn't work or if I want a deeper look into a new feature.

+1

I personaly think that popular open-source software is better tested than most non open-source (how many of these don't even have unit tests ?). Of course, I always download the source code : it helps if something doesn't work or if I want a deeper look into a new feature.

How could you possibly know that since, obviously, you don't know how most closed-source companies test their software?!?

For what it's worth, my experience shows the exact opposite, and closed-source companies usually have more tests than open-source by *several orders of magnitude*.

Why?

Because writing tests is not always fun, and open-source hackers usually move on to the next fun thing before starting to test their software.

--
Cedric

For what it's worth, my experience shows the exact opposite, and closed-source companies usually have more tests than open-source by *several orders of magnitude*.Why?Because writing tests is not always fun, and open-source hackers usually move on to the next fun thing before starting to test their software.-- Cedric

I agree that the developers won't test the software themselves. The bugs are found by the users. It's not a theory - you see it in reality in Linux and Apache.

But it's not a panacea. It only works for certain kinds of technical software with a large number of technical users.

Guglielmo

I agree that the developers won't test the software themselves. The bugs are found by the users.

I rest my case :-)

--
Cedric

I rest my case :-)-- Cedric

Why don't you rest arse in a chair and be forced to use the awful hack BEA Workshop along with the horrible BEA Portal all day long? Then tell me about hacks.

Long live Spring\Hibernate\JBoss etc.

I agree that the developers won't test the software themselves. The bugs are found by the users.

I rest my case :-)-- Cedric

:-)

But the difference is that the users who find these bugs also throw in some time and energy (=money) to fix the same.

Whereas when I find a bug in a commercial product I have to wait for the company to fix it. And since nobody can see what the fix looks like, the fix may cause another problem, which it often does.

So the bugs in commercial products are just an impediment, whereas in open source they just make the code better.

So the bugs in commercial products are just an impediment, whereas in open source they just make the code better.

I think it thats a ridiculous arguement, Cedric knows what the guts of WL look like and has (as much as) said that there plenty of test cases for WL, bug fix shouldn't cause additional bugs. I'm not sure what product you had in imnd when you said that, but I suggest you bin it. Fast.

Anyway, this thread is being hijacked by OS v. close source solutions. Can we get back on track and start hearing about the improvements (assuming there are some) in JBoss 4? I'm eager to hear from some people who have tried the new server who can compare it against v3.x

Sure! For me personally is would be good to know is there any changes in IIOP stuff. With 3.x we had problems in communication with Corba server (Parlay) where the same code was fine under Orion, Resin etc.

Dmitry
http://www.servletsuite.com/

I think it thats a ridiculous arguement, Cedric knows what the guts of WL look like and has (as much as) said that there plenty of test cases for WL, bug fix shouldn't cause additional bugs. I'm not sure what product you had in imnd when you said that, but I suggest you bin it. Fast.

Actually I never mentioned WebLogic. Why did you bring it up?

Just look at Windows. I can find you an article that explains that the more they fix Windows security bugs they more new bugs they add.

Oh, and try to be more respectful in the future.

Firstly, you mention closed source solutions, Cedric used to work for BEA so the inference in his comment is that WL has plenty of test cases. I'm not sure why you brought up Windows, it's hardly a model example of enterprise software. And I still think your arguement is ridiculous, just because source code isn't publically availble doesn't mean that every bug fix will have a knock on effect as you inferred.

Firstly, you mention closed source solutions, Cedric used to work for BEA so the inference in his comment is that WL has plenty of test cases. I'm not sure why you brought up Windows, it's hardly a model example of enterprise software.

True. I wasn't talking about enterprise software. I was talking about software in general.

And I still think your arguement is ridiculous, just because source code isn't publically availble doesn't mean that every bug fix will have a knock on effect as you inferred.

Fair enough.

BTW, sorry about the outburst. At first I misunderstood what you meant ..

Cedric,

While I don't know about JBoss, I have worked in both proprietary and open source environments. My experience is different than yours. Good programmers are usually good in either open source and proprietary models. Because of that, they take it seriously, and test on a par with commercial companies. Sure there are plenty of lamer projects that are open source, but projects that are taken seriously and are well designed have testing as a core function.

JBoss may or may not meet this criteria, but the projects we do here at the Open Source Lab take testing seriously, as do many other large, well respected, well managed projects. From a project management perspective, our products may be open source, but I expect exactly the same level of professionalism and practices as most commercial companies.

I must admit, I am surprised at your statement as it seems a common mis-perception among people who don't really understand the open source community well. It's basically a FUD statement that uses a partial truth to imply universal one. For someone whose (ex)company keeps Open Sourcing products you ought to know better. Or did BEA do poor testing on XMLBeans in the knowledge that it would be open sourced?

Jason McKerr
The Open Source Lab

First when thousands of real world production systems are up and running will the nasty bugs appear and be remedied. No amount of in-house testing can help that. Sigh..

I am more interested in the functionality of the new server. Have they done anything to meet the challenges from Spring and co?

Regards
Rolf Tollerud

I must admit, I am surprised at your statement as it seems a common mis-perception among people who don't really understand the open source community well. It's basically a FUD statement that uses a partial truth to imply universal one. For someone whose (ex)company keeps Open Sourcing products you ought to know better. Or did BEA do poor testing on XMLBeans in the knowledge that it would be open sourced?

Hm... Nowadays on TSS anything short of ass-kissing is considered a FUD. I must admit, I am a bit surprised at the level of unprofessional sensitivity and wounded innocence syndrome some Open Source projects display when it comes to comparing them with other commercial alternatives.

To defend Cedric, he was merely replying in a very professional manner to another post which stated that Open Source projects are better tested than commercial one. For some odd reason, that initial post was not considered FUD, but Cedric’s post was.

As far as BEA’s open source initiatives, they are all backed by a very powerful commercial entity which can and will invest money into development and testing whenever there is a direct or indirect profit to be made.

Regards,
--Dmitriy.

Hm... Nowadays on TSS anything short of ass-kissing is considered a FUD. I must admit, I am a bit surprised at the level of unprofessional sensitivity and wounded innocence syndrome some Open Source projects display when it comes to comparing them with other commercial alternatives.To defend Cedric, he was merely replying in a very professional manner to another post which stated that Open Source projects are better tested than commercial one. For some odd reason, that initial post was not considered FUD, but Cedric’s post was.As far as BEA’s open source initiatives, they are all backed by a very powerful commercial entity which can and will invest money into development and testing whenever there is a direct or indirect profit to be made.Regards,--Dmitriy.

Well I don't think Cedric calling the JBoss group a bunch of 'open source hacks' is very professional. So let's discuss some issues in a professional manner.

Who thinks BEA Workshop is great tool?
Who thinks developing with Weblogic Portal is far easier than writing an application with Spring?

Well I don't think Cedric calling the JBoss group a bunch of 'open source hacks' is very professional.

Where the hell did I say that?

Reread my comment. There is no mention of JBoss in my words and not even in the article I responded to.

You need to calm down and take the time to read what people write.

--
Cedric
http://beust.com/weblog

Cedric,

you need to calm down and stop typing shit. Take a look at the heading, the thread is about JBoss, and it is exactly what you meant. Reread you own comment and shut up. I don't care if you're the precious darling of your own weblog.

Well I don't think Cedric calling the JBoss group a bunch of 'open source hacks' is very professional. So let's discuss some issues in a professional manner.Who thinks BEA Workshop is great tool? Who thinks developing with Weblogic Portal is far easier than writing an application with Spring?

First of all, if you want a response, post under your real name. Post was titled "Girly man" for a reason...

Later,
Nikita Ivanov.

To defend Cedric, he was merely replying in a very professional manner to another post which stated that Open Source projects are better tested than commercial one. For some odd reason, that initial post was not considered FUD, but Cedric’s post was.

Because :
- that post was not a generalisation, and Cedric's was. I've said exactly this :

I personaly think that popular open-source software is better tested than most non open-source (how many of these don't even have unit tests ?)

- it's a personal opinion ("I personaly think") and not a rule.

That's ridiculous. Jean-Paul made a fair statement:

I personaly think that popular open-source software is better tested than most non open-source (how many of these don't even have unit tests ?). Of course, I always download the source code : it helps if something doesn't work or if I want a deeper look into a new feature.

He states that it is his opinion, limits his target (popular), and admits there are exceptions ("...most non open-source...")

How could you possibly know that since, obviously, you don't know how most closed-source companies test their software?!?

For what it's worth, my experience shows the exact opposite, and closed-source companies usually have more tests than open-source by *several orders of magnitude*.

Why?

Because writing tests is not always fun, and open-source hackers usually move on to the next fun thing before starting to test their software.

Cedric, on the other hand, flies of the handle with a hostile, condescending tone ("How could you possibly know..."), makes assumptions that he could not possibly know ("...obviously, you don't know..."), fails to give evidence apart from his own personal opinion ("...my experience shows..."), makes unsupportable superlative claims ("... ...") with dramatic exaggeration ("...*several orders of magnitude*...") and concludes with an ad hominem attack and assumption ("...open-source hackers usually move on...") that separates the world into two types of people, and implying that the group his is in is somehow superior.

How could you possibly know that since, obviously, you don't know how most closed-source companies test their software?!?For what it's worth, my experience shows the exact opposite, and closed-source companies usually have more tests than open-source by *several orders of magnitude*.Why?Because writing tests is not always fun, and open-source hackers usually move on to the next fun thing before starting to test their software.-- Cedric

You think the JBoss group is a bunch of 'open-source hackers' compared to your work at BEA. What makes you so high and mighty?

Personally, I think I'd wait until the first patch release at least.

Na. Without mass usage, it won't be as effectively tested, and the bugs you are trying to avoid won't be found and fixed.

http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar/cathedral-bazaar/ar01s05.html

Thanks to JBoss team, and congratulation to developers.
This product will be the No.1 J2EE application server, I hope.

These guys still suck at documentation.

These guys still suck at documentation.

JBoss Group makes a little money selling (not very readable) documentation, and lots more money selling support and courses.
Follow the money. Be worried about Hibernate, Tomcat and other JBoss Group projects. Ponder why JBoss people excoriated a book written about JBoss whose author was not part of JBoss group.
Despite all this I use JBoss, and have battled through the inferior documentation. I'm not sure whether I saved money over commercial offerings in the end. However, I made it over the bulk of the learning curve, so now it doesn't matter. Something to consider carefully when starting a new J2EE project with unseasoned developers: How much does their learning-curve time cost? I imagine sometimes it makes sense to choose JBoss, other times it makes sense to pay for a commercial application server.

"Be worried about Hibernate, Tomcat and other JBoss Group projects"

Tomcat is not a JBoss Group project. It's an Apache Software Foundation project. Tomcat's committers are employed by numerous companies, and one of the committers is employed by JBoss Group.

The documentation for Tomcat is developed independently of the documentation for JBoss. The core docs are free (as are the JavaDocs and source code of course). On top of that, there are numerous printed and online resources, some free and some not, that cover all aspects of Tomcat development, deployment, and configuration.

"Be worried about Hibernate, Tomcat and other JBoss Group projects"Tomcat is not a JBoss Group project. It's an Apache Software Foundation project. Tomcat's committers are employed by numerous companies, and one of the committers is employed by JBoss Group.The documentation for Tomcat is developed independently of the documentation for JBoss. The core docs are free (as are the JavaDocs and source code of course). On top of that, there are numerous printed and online resources, some free and some not, that cover all aspects of Tomcat development, deployment, and configuration.

so basically i should go in and search in thousands of mailing lists to get an answer for my query and JBOSS not releasing a good documentation of their damn product or letting anyone else write on is all good. Wow !! u must be a JBOSS member. ITs a shame to call jboss open source as they are bunch of money minded folks. Thanks to Apache otherwise open source community would have expired by now. I m waiting for Apache to come up with an answer to JBOSS.

I m waiting for Apache to come up with an answer to JBOSS.

Geronimo...

I m waiting for Apache to come up with an answer to JBOSS.

Geronimo...

its not fully ready yet. Otherwise Jboss thread would not have been this long.

"Be worried about Hibernate, Tomcat and other JBoss Group projects"Tomcat is not a JBoss Group project. It's an Apache Software Foundation project. Tomcat's committers are employed by numerous companies, and one of the committers is employed by JBoss Group.The documentation for Tomcat is developed independently of the documentation for JBoss. The core docs are free (as are the JavaDocs and source code of course). On top of that, there are numerous printed and online resources, some free and some not, that cover all aspects of Tomcat development, deployment, and configuration.

so basically i should go in and search in thousands of mailing lists to get an answer for my query and JBOSS not releasing a good documentation of their damn product or letting anyone else write on is all good. Wow !! u must be a JBOSS member. ITs a shame to call jboss open source as they are bunch of money minded folks. Thanks to Apache otherwise open source community would have expired by now. I m waiting for Apache to come up with an answer to JBOSS.

Instead of whining go and write documentation for JBoss yourself and give it away for free. Yeah, you couldn't imagine taking on such monumental work without getting paid for your professional time - which is quite valuable, of course.

The only way open source thrives beyond a tech/hacker/hobbiest stage is if it has sponsors with deep pockets (who themselves have alterior motives such as IBM wanting to see Windows and Solaris taken down a few notches via its weapon of Linux), or it adopts a dual licensing approach ala mySQL.

A Linux resellor like Red Hat or SuSE sells support per each machine that it's deployed on. Want continous support for enterprise production-use machines and coverage through upgrades both incremental and major, then you'll pay up. In the end you're paying a per machine fee. Technically and legally it's not a EULA as such, but pocket book-wise it might as well be. (And only open source idealogical fanatics and true programming hobbiest care about having access to source code - enterprise IT professionals don't have time to dive into kernel code to see what's happening. Some may occasionally want to recompile the kernel but not very many. And with more and more things dynamically installable, the reasons for recompiling diminish.)

And so open source software comes full circle back around to a financial model that is not so disimilar to a proprietary model. The reason is simple - is the only way to generate profits for cost of operation and to pay for R&D to stay in business over the long haul. In the end, the socialist whacko pipe dream of something for nothing (high quality, free, open source software) is indeed nothing but a pipe full of crack cocaine. Captialism will reassert itself in the end or else all things free will eventually come to an end.

And only open source idealogical fanatics and true programming hobbiest care about having access to source code - enterprise IT professionals don't have time to dive into kernel code to see what's happening

Glad to read I'm a hobbiest. I didn't knew it was possible to live from my hobbies :)

And only open source idealogical fanatics and true programming hobbiest care about having access to source code - enterprise IT professionals don't have time to dive into kernel code to see what's happening

Glad to read I'm a hobbiest. I didn't knew it was possible to live from my hobbies :)

Was a reference to us the corporate customers of such commercial open source software, such as Linux and JBoss - not the people that do the primary development of it.

Congratulations JBOSS Team

Congratulations JBOSS Team

JCA 1.5 does not work in JBo$$. I tried to deploy SwiftMQ's JCA 1.5 RA but had to give up. You can even not define administered objects in JBo$$.

As with the other OS crap like Jonas and Geronimo, this seems just a quick and dirty "we are compliant" release. I bet they never tested JCA 1.5 with another JMS RA.

-- Andreas

Congratulations JBOSS Team

JCA 1.5 does not work in JBo$$. I tried to deploy SwiftMQ's JCA 1.5 RA but had to give up. You can even not define administered objects in JBo$$.As with the other OS crap like Jonas and Geronimo, this seems just a quick and dirty "we are compliant" release. I bet they never tested JCA 1.5 with another JMS RA. -- Andreas

oh COME ONE, an open-source project finally gets some recognition for good work and gets funding and now thier demonized with $$ in thier name. There was a day when that was reserved for the likes of Micro$oft, which makes sense. You should be ashamed of yourself, they still give the (pretty dang good) software away for free and you can't let them make money of documentation and support. Thats the whole point of OSS, and they have to make money from something. OSS supports education, learning, and discovery.

A note to everyone:
Simple economics, software costs money and it has to come from somwhere. No money = crap software. Grow up, if you want documentation so bad without paying for it, read the code. If you want functionality so bad without paying for it, write it yourself. If you don't contrubite to open-source in some fashion, you have no right to critisize it's shortcomings.
-Kurt Krumm

Congratulations JBOSS Team

JCA 1.5 does not work in JBo$$. I tried to deploy SwiftMQ's JCA 1.5 RA but had to give up. You can even not define administered objects in JBo$$.As with the other OS crap like Jonas and Geronimo, this seems just a quick and dirty "we are compliant" release. I bet they never tested JCA 1.5 with another JMS RA. -- Andreas

TSS is a strange place to file bug reports on JBoss, but...

SwiftMQ resource adaptor DOES work with JBoss 4.0.

It is true that we don't do anything with admin object, but the spec does not define what should be done with them, other than it is vendor specific and requires an administrator's intervention. Feel free to join the discussion here.

Bill

P.S. $wiftMQ is still much more expensive than JB0$$.

P.P.S. Also, you should thank Adrian Brock for putting together the WIKI page so quickly.

TSS is a strange place to file bug reports on JBoss, but...SwiftMQ resource adaptor DOES work with JBoss 4.0.It is true that we don't do anything with admin object, but the spec does not define what should be done with them, other than it is vendor specific and requires an administrator's intervention. Feel free to join the discussion here.BillP.S. $wiftMQ is still much more expensive than JB0$$.P.P.S. Also, you should thank Adrian Brock for putting together the WIKI page so quickly.

Surprise but thanks. I will test inbound with transactions etc.

I didn't meant inbound which is quite easy because everything is configured in the ejb-jar.xml. I meant outbound (and in/outbound). That didn't work. Deployment failed. I read all your Wiki pages but ran in a circle.

For outbound messaging you need the administered objects, not for inbound. If one is not able to create them administratively in JBo$$, how should a component be able to send to or receive from it? That you don't see that just shows that you didn't test it with another RA (e.g. Sun's RA) except yours.

-- Andreas

Why would a sender/publisher define/deploy the Queue it is going to
send messages to?

How do you deploy the receiver if the destination doesn't exist
until the sender is active?

You look these things up using JNDI. It's pretty basic stuff that
existed back in the jms-1.0/jca-1.0 days long before admin objects.

Let's take your DeploymentException to the jboss forums rather than
posting TROLLs about open source inadequecy:
http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewforum&f=48

Off Topic: I never understood why Swift insists on inplementing ASF
(I don't mean the ConnectionConsumer, I mean the ServerSessionPool)
when the spec clearly says it is the application server's repsonsiblity?
It's a given that the spec isn't very clear on how they should interact,
and the distinction is irrelevent with jca-1.5 :-)

Why would a sender/publisher define/deploy the Queue it is going to send messages to?How do you deploy the receiver if the destination doesn't existuntil the sender is active?You look these things up using JNDI. It's pretty basic stuff thatexisted back in the jms-1.0/jca-1.0 days long before admin objects.

Prior to 1.5 we had to replicate our JNDI into JBoss' JNDI. Or we had to write an MBean which does this. Or may be there is a way via a proprietary JBoss config option. Don't know.

JCA 1.5 is JMS pluggability. There must be a way to create administered objects in a standard way in order that components can use them for addressing. These objects might contain attributes of the resource itself. That's why they are JavaBeans. The app server can reflect it, create it via admin tools and store them in their JNDI.

The big advantage for us as a resource adapter provider is that we don't have to care about configuration details because everything is specified. It's all standard and should be plug and play.

Off Topic: I never understood why Swift insists on inplementing ASF(I don't mean the ConnectionConsumer, I mean the ServerSessionPool)when the spec clearly says it is the application server's repsonsiblity?It's a given that the spec isn't very clear on how they should interact,and the distinction is irrelevent with jca-1.5 :-)

I don't understand what you mean. SwiftMQ's RA uses ASF internally. The reason is that we reuse our existing, mature code for message inflow. Since we had our parts of ASF already (ConnectionConsumer etc), we had to create the missing parts (ServerSessionPool). The only reason why you see this is that you can configure it. It's not relevant however; it's just internal SwiftMQ stuff.

But again, you did never test with another RA than yours. And you call this a "production release"?

-- Andreas

There must be a way to create administered objects in a standard way in order that components can use them for addressing. These objects might contain attributes of the resource itself. That's why they are JavaBeans. The app server can reflect it, create it via admin tools and store them in their JNDI.The big advantage for us as a resource adapter provider is that we don't have to care about configuration details because everything is specified. It's all standard and should be plug and play.

Thanks, I know how to implement it now. Calling it "standard/plug and play"
is a bit disengious when it is left to a vendor specific mechanism to actually
deploy these. This is true for all JNDI configuration.

Off Topic: I never understood why Swift insists on inplementing ASF(I don't mean the ConnectionConsumer, I mean the ServerSessionPool)when the spec clearly says it is the application server's repsonsiblity?It's a given that the spec isn't very clear on how they should interact,and the distinction is irrelevent with jca-1.5 :-)

I don't understand what you mean. SwiftMQ's RA uses ASF internally. The reason is that we reuse our existing, mature code for message inflow.

I'm not talking about the RA, I mean the j2ee-1.3 days. Like I said, it is
irrelevent now.

But again, you did never test with another RA than yours. And you call this a "production release"?-- Andreas

Not true, but you are correct in that I didn't test with an RA that uses
admin objects, otherwise I would have known how to implement these things.

Off Topic (again): Where's the preview button in these forums?

This is ridiculous. Am I to learn nothing of any new functionality for the new JBoss 4.0 version from this thread but only listen to boring bickering over Open vs Closed source? There must be something.

Or?

Since there is no documentation about what is new in 4.0, how could we discuss it? Oh, there is no documentation whatsoever about 4.0. Please correct me if I am wrong.

Have a look here:

http://sourceforge.net/docman/index.php?group_id=22866

There is a section called "4.0.x Change Notes". Now you are free to consolidate those three documents into one and post your work into the JBoss-Wiki on JBoss.org. See, sometimes it's easier to change something than to complain about it.

HTH,
Tobias

rolf++

There must be something to tell us about. Is there anyone from Jboss reading this list? Chip Tyler? Are you there?

rolf++ There must be something to tell us about.

Ya want cool new features?

How about:

    @Tx(TxType.REQUIRED)
    public void doSomething()
    {
       ...
    }

Bye, bye session beans!

"Be worried about Hibernate, Tomcat and other JBoss Group projects"Tomcat is not a JBoss Group project. It's an Apache Software Foundation project. Tomcat's committers are employed by numerous companies, and one of the committers is employed by JBoss Group.The documentation for Tomcat is developed independently of the documentation for JBoss. The core docs are free (as are the JavaDocs and source code of course). On top of that, there are numerous printed and online resources, some free and some not, that cover all aspects of Tomcat development, deployment, and configuration.

so basically i should go in and search in thousands of mailing lists to get an answer for my query and JBOSS not releasing a good documentation of their damn product or letting anyone else write on is all good. Wow !! u must be a JBOSS member. ITs a shame to call jboss open source as they are bunch of money minded folks. Thanks to Apache otherwise open source community would have expired by now. I m waiting for Apache to come up with an answer to JBOSS.

Instead of whining go and write documentation for JBoss yourself and give it away for free. Yeah, you couldn't imagine taking on such monumental work without getting paid for your professional time - which is quite valuable, of course.The only way open source thrives beyond a tech/hacker/hobbiest stage is if it has sponsors with deep pockets (who themselves have alterior motives such as IBM wanting to see Windows and Solaris taken down a few notches via its weapon of Linux), or it adopts a dual licensing approach ala mySQL.A Linux resellor like Red Hat or SuSE sells support per each machine that it's deployed on. Want continous support for enterprise production-use machines and coverage through upgrades both incremental and major, then you'll pay up. In the end you're paying a per machine fee. Technically and legally it's not a EULA as such, but pocket book-wise it might as well be. (And only open source idealogical fanatics and true programming hobbiest care about having access to source code - enterprise IT professionals don't have time to dive into kernel code to see what's happening. Some may occasionally want to recompile the kernel but not very many. And with more and more things dynamically installable, the reasons for recompiling diminish.)And so open source software comes full circle back around to a financial model that is not so disimilar to a proprietary model. The reason is simple - is the only way to generate profits for cost of operation and to pay for R&D to stay in business over the long haul. In the end, the socialist whacko pipe dream of something for nothing (high quality, free, open source software) is indeed nothing but a pipe full of crack cocaine. Captialism will reassert itself in the end or else all things free will eventually come to an end.

Its not a question of us writing on our own or not. There was a case last year ( may be 2 yrs back ) when JBOSs group took action against a book writer who was writing a giuide on JBOSS. This is the freak control JBOSS team has over everything.
Also me writing a guide - well duh - do you expcet me to go thru each of their classes and then try to understand what they do ??? What crap is stuffed in your head ?? And at the same time why dont you compare JBOSAS with other open source softwares who provide great documentation - most of them atleast get us all started very fast and provide really good resources. You dont seem to understand how frustated people are with jboss when they get stuck somewhere. I guess jboss people dont want young learning programmers to use it. they want only some elite few to be a snob like them. all your crap you talked about cannot be justified at all. And as I said befpre - wait for Germino. You will look stupid. Very few open source initiatives have matched Apache's quality and documentation. Thats just the truth.

The reason is simple - is the only way to generate profits for cost of operation and to pay for R&D to stay in business over the long haul. In the end, the socialist whacko pipe dream of something for nothing (high quality, free, open source software) is indeed nothing but a pipe full of crack cocaine. Captialism will reassert itself in the end or else all things free will eventually come to an end.

Or, just get a day job and code at night or on the weekend.

You are just rationalizing open source away, but without success. At the end of the day the value of open source is people writing code that they feel they want to share with other people.

so basically i should go in and search in thousands of mailing lists to get an answer for my query and JBOSS not releasing a good documentation of their damn product or letting anyone else write on is all good. Wow !! u must be a JBOSS member. ITs a shame to call jboss open source as they are bunch of money minded folks. Thanks to Apache otherwise open source community would have expired by now. I m waiting for Apache to come up with an answer to JBOSS.

What a troll.

1. The JBoss Administration and Development guide is pretty good, and is free as long as you have a login (http://jboss.org/docs/index).

2. The Wiki contains a ton of useful development information, no need for a login (http://jboss.org/wiki/Wiki.jsp).

3. AFAIK, most of the JBoss revenue nowadays is coming from support contracts with large customers that need some peace of mind, not the $10-a-pop hardcopy manual sales. It therefore makes sense for them to expand their user base faster by providing more and better documentation, which they are doing (see items 1 and 2).

You're about two years behind the times, man.

so basically i should go in and search in thousands of mailing lists to get an answer for my query and JBOSS not releasing a good documentation of their damn product or letting anyone else write on is all good. Wow !! u must be a JBOSS member. ITs a shame to call jboss open source as they are bunch of money minded folks. Thanks to Apache otherwise open source community would have expired by now. I m waiting for Apache to come up with an answer to JBOSS.

What a troll.1. The JBoss Administration and Development guide is pretty good, and is free as long as you have a login (http://jboss.org/docs/index).2. The Wiki contains a ton of useful development information, no need for a login (http://jboss.org/wiki/Wiki.jsp).3. AFAIK, most of the JBoss revenue nowadays is coming from support contracts with large customers that need some peace of mind, not the $10-a-pop hardcopy manual sales. It therefore makes sense for them to expand their user base faster by providing more and better documentation, which they are doing (see items 1 and 2).You're about two years behind the times, man.

Just giving a link doesnt help it woman. Stop window shopping. Go into the details of the documentation and you will see a ton of stuff missing or assumed or just wrong.

Just giving a link doesnt help it woman. Stop window shopping. Go into the details of the documentation and you will see a ton of stuff missing or assumed or just wrong.

Your petulant attitude and hollow criticisms are about as constructive as a cyanide cocktail. "Good" is, of course, a subjective adjective, and like I said, I consider the JBoss Administration and Development guide to be "pretty good". It has fit my needs. It is quite possible that it has not fit yours. If that is the case, you would be much better served specifying the areas where you believe it falls short or the information you have searched for and not found, rather than asking people to "see a ton of stuff [that is] missing."

JBoss Group makes a little money selling (not very readable) documentation, and lots more money selling support and courses.Follow the money. Be worried about Hibernate, Tomcat and other JBoss Group projects. Ponder why JBoss people excoriated a book written about JBoss whose author was not part of JBoss group.

It's hard to begrudge JBoss for making some cash from documentation. Say what you like about the product, they put in a lot of effort and deserve something for it. Having said that, it would not say much for the open source model if the main source of revenue was documentation. JBoss is a sufficiently distinct and complex product to warrant some decent documentation. Unfortunately, quality documentation just isn't there - either in JBoss's own work or any third-party work I know of. Having access to code does help, but the code is not optimised for casual browsing (nor should it be). If anyone knows of a decent JBoss reference, I'm listening.

Hibernate and Spring are both examples of products that owe a good deal of their success to clear, comprehensive, up-to-date documentation. Yes, they are quality products too, but many good products have failed due to lack of docs. IMO JBoss might be shooting itself in the foot, long term, by using docs as a revenue source.

In any event, congratulations to the JBoss team for achieving the certification, it's a milestone for open source.

IMO JBoss might be shooting itself in the foot, long term, by using docs as a revenue source.

I am not a lawyer (IANAL) and ..

.. I am not a JBoss Grouper (IANAJBG) but ..

.. I thought that JBoss docs were free now.

Peace,

Cameron Purdy
Tangosol, Inc.
Coherence: Shared Memories for J2EE Clusters

IMO JBoss might be shooting itself in the foot, long term, by using docs as a revenue source.

I am not a lawyer (IANAL) and .... I am not a JBoss Grouper (IANAJBG) but .... I thought that JBoss docs were free now.Peace,Cameron PurdyTangosol, Inc.Coherence: Shared Memories for J2EE Clusters

The quality of their "Free" documentation is so bad that i have seen cut n paste culture going on from version to version. Old version references in new versions and lot of other mistakes. ITs the worst documentation I have ever seen for a App server of this level. As I said before When apache guys come out with a EJB container... Bye Bye JBoss - Go clean ur butt with your own stupid documentation.
As someone else said on this thread - a good product means good documentation also - not just bunch of new feature piled on top which are not used by 99% of the users as they dont have a clue how to use them. nothing to refer to. You can not create a loyal customer base without good documentation. Its impossible. And it will be proven sooner or later.

 - just a little over 2 cents.

When apache guys come out with a EJB container... Bye Bye JBoss - Go clean ur butt with your own stupid documentation.

Why should we wait for Geronimo? JOnAS is out there and seems to have decent docs. Actually they seem pretty darn good. Ok, it's not certified. So what.. Disclaimer: I haven't used JOnAS on a project. I am not affiliated to JOnAS or ObjectWeb in any way.

//jay

<quote>
Why should we wait for Geronimo? JOnAS is out there and seems to have decent docs. Actually they seem pretty darn good. Ok, it's not certified.
</quote>

he he he, this is typical in a product development. If you have a good and stable product, nobody will talk about it... ;-) This is the case with JOnAS, Enhydra. They just work and have very good documentations.
Because of their root (ObjectWeb) in research (INRIA), they just don't make agressive marketing campaigns. Similar to Apache.

We have written our experience in building OpenUSS (Open Source component-based J2EE Learning Mangement System, developed and deployed in Enhydra and JOnAS) in this paper:

"Developing, Deploying, Using and Evaluating an Open Source
Learning Management System":
http://openuss01.uni-muenster.de/foundation/faculty/FacultyInfoDetailPage.po?FacultyInfoId=1086323847801

BTW., congrats for the new release of JBoss 4.0 to the JBoss team! (Amazing to see, that in year 2000 - as I wrote a JBoss article for the German Java Magazin www.javamagazin.de - JBoss was in still the version 2.0... Now 4 years later, the product is getting more mature and can compete with other commercial products).

Cheers,
Lofi Dewanto.
OpenUSS, EJOSA.

The JBossWiki is available and does an amazingly good job at answering questions. The 4.0 Getting Started guide should have been posted with the original release, but apparently there was a small mixup. The second release of it should go out as early as this afternoon.

All in all, documentation coverage for 4.0 isn't too bad.

I wish I could agree. I wanted to use JBoss to host my server application. I am not talking regular EJB/WEB app. I found that there is little documentation about the new remoting functionality. The document that does exist doesn't really answer the basic question of how do I use it. I am not bagging Jboss. I think it's great that is why I am going to use it to host my application. BUT I just wish I could download a complete source that will compile completly from scratch AND generate Java Doc.

I found that there is little documentation about the new remoting functionality. The document that does exist doesn't really answer the basic question of how do I use it.

Scott, post any questions you have about JBoss remoting to http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewforum&f=176; I will answer them (including questions about remoting docs).

-Tom

BUT I just wish I could download a complete source that will compile completly from scratch AND generate Java Doc.

1. download the src bundle.
2. unzip
3. cd jboss-x.x.x/build
4. build.sh (or build.bat)

Full dist of jboss is created in jboss-x.x.x/build/output

To build javadocs:

1. cd to one of the subdirectories server/, messaging/, etc...
2. build javadocs

Regards,

Bill

Tom: I will do that.

Bill: Thanks for the response. I have done just that. I have even downloaded the lastest head from CVS and the build fails. If I do "build all" it fails. There is a problem with the jaxrpc module.

Please don't get me wrong I think Jboss is the best.

Regards

Scott Warren
Ocom Software
www.ocom.com.au

If I do "build all" it fails. There is a problem with the jaxrpc module.

This has been fixed and checked in (earlier today). The 'all' target will build the javadoc for all the modules and place under the main output directory.

Ok, over the last 6 years, I've found bugs in just about every webserver and ejb container I've used. The only difference I see is this. In the past when i report a bug to IBM or BEA, it takes 6-8 months to get it fixed. when I use tomcat or other mature Open source applications, I can fix the dam bug in a few hours and move on with writing the app. It's just that simple for me. If the management tells me to use Server X, that's what I have to live with. When I get to choose, I prefer open source because I expect to find bugs. I haven't seen cases where company X provides a patch within a month, even when we have an expensive support contract.

My experience with BEA WLS is that they are extremely quick to issue fixes to the bugs reported to them.

My experience with BEA WLS is that they are extremely quick to issue fixes to the bugs reported to them.

just to clarify, 6 months is pretty darn good considering the complexity of ejb containers. but if I only have 2 months to build an app and deliver it, every day counts. The last time I reported a bug to BEA was back in 2000. it took them 1 week to verify the bug, which is pretty quick compared to the bugs I reported to IBM. I was told a week later in an email it would be fixed in the next release, which was due out in 4-8 months. the next release came out in 6 months, which is still pretty darn good.

In the mean time I had to rewrite the app to work around the bug. that's life, but if I had access to the source, I can patch it myself and not spend a lot of time rewriting an app. Once the new release came out, I dropped in the original version of the app I wrote. Luckily I kept the original version, since I got confirmation from BEA they were fixing it.

My experience with BEA WLS is that they are extremely quick to issue fixes to the bugs reported to them.

Me too. I was thinking Windows vs. Linux.

P.S. I use WebLogic Server in both development production, because it has a recovery log ;-)

This is a horrible blatant waste of effort!!!

There are other open source servers out there. They should wake up to themselves and contribute to other projects! Otherwise, open soure will never get anywhere in the corporate J2EE arena!

Cheers,
Arron.


PS: anyone that takes this as not sarcasm is a waste of effort too.

Well done!

- geir

P.S. It's "Apache Tomcat", and it's not a JBoss project. It's an Apache Software Foundation project. They do pay one of the many committers to work on it, but there are many committers :)

P.P.S. Again, well done, JBoss!

How long does it take to start up? Last time I checked (early 3 release) it took almost 20 seconds on my P4 laptop..

Congratulations to the JBoss team!
IMHO, The most important issue with this new release is the perfomance,
I don't know that there is any benchmark for this release yet, but I think
a fully AO kernel may cause some perfomance degradation


--Alireza Taherkordi