At 10:45 PM 6/3/2002, Rob Nagler wrote:
>Stephen Adkins writes:
>
>Secondly, now that I think I understand your motives better, I wonder
>if there is a need for P5EE. There are many fine toolkits out there,
>which are being used for enterprise applications. Perhaps the best
>thing we can do is to encourage people to publish their uses of
>mod_perl and the lessons they have learned. This is the primary
>reason we released bOP as open source. We don't have high
>expectations that people will use it. Hopefully, they'll take a look
>and learn from it. And, if we're lucky, give us feedback on how to
>improve it.
I am very much for P5EE as a "documentation project" as opposed to coding
project. ie how to do the equivalent of J2EE using what people have already
done in CPAN and more.
I think P5EE coding can help with certain things that we lack in Perl like
the equivalent of beans or config objects or property files. But then
again, it doesn't necessarily have to be a common code base and perhaps it
is too ambitious a project.
Anyway, the problem with P5EE as a "documentation project" is someone to
document, but the idea of soliciting the authors of P5EE-like modules and
framekworks to write their own writeup within the context of an enterprise
might be useful. Especially if we could generally agree on a format of
comparison (eg POE compared to Soap-Lite) for similar "enterprise"
frameworks and people wanting to know which to use and which situation.
Later,
Gunther
