James Duncan writes: > Yes, it is a boogie man. As yet I've not seen any general consensus on > what p5ee actually should do; it seems a little premature for voting on > a code-base for the *enterprise* edition of Perl.
What about Java's "write once, run anywhere". It still isn't true. Marketing is name and recognition. The first happens before the second. > Personally I'd rather see P5EEx::Blue go onto CPAN as P5EEx::Blue. If > its what people want, then they'll use it -- while I agree that j2ee is > as much hype as substance the name isn't the reason people use it, it's > because it has some pretty useful functionality and someone splashed out > a lot of money to have some people write some articles about it. J2EE is a random collection of APIs thrown together. EJB is a disaster from a scalability point of view. Entity beans are a bad idea that doesn't scale, but they are *Enterprise* Java Beans which means a lot of people threw *development* money at them to find out that they don't work. > Maybe later on if it has widespread acceptance across thousands of sites > then it can have its name changed, until that point, to become Perl 5 > Enterprise Edition requires a little more that six random people on a > random mailing list. Some of us have actually worked on enterprise systems. :-) > Like certification, without Larry's blessing or > that of a significant portion of the community, you've got a nice name > for a module, not a framework for enterprise computing with Perl. Unfortunately most Perlers probably have never worked on enterprise class systems. This was unfortunately the case for a lot of the students or just-out-of-schoolers who wrote the original Java APIs which are now called J2EE. Rob
