Re: [jakarta.ee-community] Why not dropping EARs in Jakarta EE?

[Mark Struberg <struberg@xxxxxxxx>]

+1

EARs are a nice idea. But they are basically non portable between containers ever since.
Especially when it comes to accessing or sharing information between WARs.
This severly affects CDI for example.

This is due to the lush definition of the visibility rules in the umbrella spec.
The EE spec only talks about SHOULD, and doesn't even define a default visibility strategy which MUST be supported

I've had a long discussion with Linda, Bill and a few other EE leaders about this already (starting early 2015).
During that I've created a sample which highlights the visibility issues back then:

https://github.com/struberg/cdi-ear-test

LieGrue,
strub



> Am 29.04.2018 um 11:55 schrieb Ralph Soika <ralph.soika@xxxxxxxxx>:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> thanks for all you comments on this subject. Basically I am convinced that EARs were originally a fine idea. And I am developing an open source project[1] based on EAR since years.
> 
> But the concept of a separation between the role of developers, deployers and administrators, which is central to EARs, in my opinion, has never been properly understood. And that results in the lacking support and all this discussions in which one talks past each other.
> 
> Ears can continue to be part of the spec. I have no problem with that. But I think EARs should no longer be recommended as best practice in the future. There are better concepts out now.
> 
> [1] https://github.com/imixs/imixs-office-workflow
> 
> best regards
> Ralph
> _______________________________________________
> jakarta.ee-community mailing list
> jakarta.ee-community@xxxxxxxxxxx
> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakarta.ee-community