[wsas-java-dev] positioning of wsas "embeddable" version

[Sanjiva Weerawarana]

Definitely +1 for embeddable Tomcat. Will there be a majorly noticeable 
change in the size of the distro?

WS Container sounds like a good name for the servlet edition .. but I 
agree with not changing the name again. Also, servlet edition is accurate- 
it runs as a servlet! We can later do a say a JCA edition .. which would 
run as a JCA connector (Paul had some ideas on how to do this and IIRC did 
a proto too). (No hurry for this AFAIK but maybe something to give like an 
intern to play with to build up. Paul?)

MOST DEFINITELY +1 for making WSAS standalone edition top of the line! 
There's no reason whatsoever why we can't become that next runtime people 
run in their infra without question.

Sanjiva.

Afkham Azeez wrote:
> Please Note: Embeddable version is now called WSO2 WSAS Servlet Edition.
> 
> I also was discussing the possibility of replacing Jetty(We do not use
> commons HTTP) with embeddable  Tomcat. We observed that WSAS runs faster
> on Tomcat than with Jetty. Shall we switch to embeddable Tomcat and
> scrap the Jetty integration code? I'm sure Amila & Sandakith will jump
> in and help us :)
> 
> +1 for placing more emphasis, in terms of marketing/PR, on the
> servlet-edition. An App Server which runs within an App Server sounds a
> bit weird. May be we can call the servlet-edition "WSO2 Web Services
> Container". We need to test it on more J2EE App servers such as
> Webshere/Weblogic, and improve the installer to include these servers.
> 
> IMHO, we should also develop the standalone edition to be a industry
> grade server. If JBoss/Tomcat can do it, certainly can we. Some people
> may want a lightweight container to simply host Web services.
> 
> One other thing, it may not be too good to change the name of the
> product too frequently.
> 
> -- Azeez
> 
> 
> Ajith Ranabahu wrote:
>> Hi,
>> My perspective is that the embeddable version would be the more
>> appealing version for the enterprise customer (and even for the average
>> developer. I'm sure most of the developers have tomcat or similar
>> servlet container running in their machines. Judging by the mailing
>> lists for Axis2 - which I believe is equally applicable to WSAS - we can
>> definitely say the major interest is in the embeddable version. FYI some
>> guys here didn't have a clue that Axis2/WSAS ships with a default server!)
>>
>> I would say the standalone version (at the current state) would be
>> appealing to a developer just to have a feeling about or perhaps
>> develop/debug on it for a while. But actual deployment is more likely to
>> happen on an industry grade server, at least tomcat.
>>
>> As a suggestion while putting the embeddable version in the front, would
>> it be worth to have a more robust standalone version based on tomcat ?
>> I'm sure tomcat can be stripped down to a bare minimum and WSAS attached
>> to it without much effort [We do have tomcat experts around. Both Amila
>> and Sandakith do know all the ins and outs of tomcat :)]. This can be
>> shipped as a complete server package (of course with the modules
>> preconfigured) to any of the interested parties who want to start from
>> scratch. We can even admit that we are using the 'proven tomcat
>> platform', which certainly will be better received than commons HTTP  :)
>>
>> Ajith
>>
>> Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote:
>>> Hi Guys,
>>>
>>> I've been wondering lately whether we're over-positioning the standalone
>>> version compared to the version that runs on top of
>>> JBoss/WL/WAS/Geronimo etc..
>>>
>>> The reason is that the standalone version is a disruptive story. That
>>> is, customers have to put up our *server* as a key part of their mission
>>> critical infrastructure. That's a harder sell than say putting up a bit
>>> of code in their already running server platform.
>>>
>>> A HUGE advantage we have over the WS stacks of any *one* of
>>> JBoss/WL/WAS/etc. is that ours runs on all of them. Many customers have
>>> more than one of these app servers in production and having a single
>>> high performant WS-* stack that works the same on all of them would be
>>> quite valuable as they don't have to muck around with app-server
>>> specific details. This is especially awesome once we start performing
>>> better than JBoss-WS on JBoss etc..
>>>
>>> What do you think? We need to work on adjusting the PR and messaging if
>>> we're to make the "embeddable" version more appealing ... starting with
>>> coming up with a better name for it.
>>>
>>> Sanjiva.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wsas-java-dev mailing list
>> Wsas-java-dev at wso2.org
>> http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/wsas-java-dev
>>
> 
> 

-- 
Sanjiva Weerawarana, Ph.D.
Founder, Chairman & CEO; WSO2, Inc.; http://www.wso2.com/
email: sanjiva at wso2.com; cell: +94 77 787 6880; fax: +1 509 691 2000

"Oxygenating the Web Service Platform."