Yes, I think this is the best way. I would wait with it until 5th or 6th of
January, when people are back from holidays.
I will later then make a proposal for the vote and if we agree on that, we
should do the vote...



2014-12-27 15:20 GMT+01:00 John D. Ament <[email protected]>:

> As best as I can tell from reading this thread, there is no clear winner.
> I would recommend you guys hold a vote first before making any changes
> requested within here.
>
> On Wed Dec 24 2014 at 10:30:36 AM Werner Keil <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > Huge thread, so I'll stick to the format question for now, see inline.
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 24, 2014 at 9:56 AM, Oliver B. Fischer <
> > [email protected]
> > > wrote:
> >
> > > See inline...
> > > Am 24.12.14 um 02:07 schrieb Anatole Tresch:
> > >
> > >> 3.) Should we define any configuration formats, and if so which one?
> > >> *​​-> I would like to see a minimal set of formats in core, so we can
> > >> provide a min​i​mal dependency version​ that fits most needs​.
> > >> .properties,
> > >> .xml(properties) and .ini I think is a good set, but definitively not
> > >> more.*
> > >> *-> We can then leverage apache commons config with bridges in the
> > >> extension modules for suporting additional formats ;).​ ​*
> > >>
> > >
> > > At my company we use mostly
> https://github.com/typesafehub/config/blob/
> > > master/HOCON.md and YAML. For me only property files and the other
> > > mentioned formats feel a little bit outdated. Not only because they
> exist
> > > already for a long time but for their usability.
> > >
> > > Writing large configurations is mostly about structuring the
> information
> > > you provide. In this area are property files weak and no one wants XML
> > > again. If I would tell this someone around me the answer would be:
> "Come
> > > back if you have something more usefull."
> > >
> > >
> > In one of the largest clouds outside the infrastructure of the likes of
> > Google, Amazon, Microsoft, etc. (on top of Kokki/Multiconf) we used JSON
> > and some components also used YAML. However, these are just the DevOps
> > duties like build management and processing with some management,
> > provisioning and monitoring of the actual servers, too.
> >
> > When it comes to configuration of various Enterprise Containers and Java
> EE
> > applications to be deployed there in all the various stages, XML rules.
> And
> > those who really think for the actual Java part everything can be done
> > purely with annotations probably also insist, Santa is coming through
> their
> > chimney tonight ;-D
> >
> > Purely annotation based solutions are nice to do quick demos, but if you
> > need true staging all the way from your local development box to a giant
> > cluster in production, at least the server and containers requires loads
> of
> > XML to provision it correctly for each container, and without touching
> and
> > changing the code for every step, there is practically no production
> ready
> > app servers today supporting that, even if the app may truly be written
> > just with annotations supporting everything from local dev boxes to
> > production, then the slightest change in each of these phases would still
> > break everything. And those large cloud solutions by big vendors normally
> > get deployed by others that are not supposed to build and compile your
> app
> > again;-) OSGi sounded promising also for EE containers, but Glassfish
> > (which had some good support for it) is merely the Java EE RI now and
> JBoss
> > WildFly also removed it. So dynamic loading and injection of components
> at
> > runtime becomes harder.
> >
> > I also looked into HOCON which is a nice approach, though a bit limited.
> > Fortunately, what it admits to be missing, Java is getting as a standard
> > these days, a unit subsystem (JSR 363). On the monitoring front, Parfait
> > https://code.google.com/p/parfait/ shows how the earlier JSR (275) is
> used
> > for support of  MB, GB, etc. but also other vital signs of the system if
> > needed like temperature (seamless and typesafe whether it's °C or F;-) US
> > Smart Grid vendor Opower wrote a JSON binding solution around Unit-API
> > (0.6, the "missing link" betweeen 275 and 363) so supporting formats like
> > JSON for data exchange also works. There's an upcoming JSR for JSON-B, so
> > maybe under Java EE 8 or with this on its own, you may use Java EE
> > standards there, too, until then alternatives like Jackson or GSON, do,
> > too.
> >
> > Merry Christmas,
> >
> > Werner Keil | JCP Executive Committee Member, JSR 363 Co Spec Lead |
> > Eclipse UOMo Lead, Babel Language Champion | Apache Committer | Advisory
> > Board Member, DWX '15
> >
> > Twitter @wernerkeil | @UnitAPI | @JSR354 | @AgoravaProj | @DeviceMap |
> > #EclipseUOMo
> > | #DevOps
> > Skype werner.keil | Google+ gplus.to/wernerkeil
> >
>



-- 
*Anatole Tresch*
Java Engineer & Architect, JSR Spec Lead
Glärnischweg 10
CH - 8620 Wetzikon

*Switzerland, Europe Zurich, GMT+1*
*Twitter:  @atsticks*
*Blogs: **http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/
<http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/>*

*Google: atsticksMobile  +41-76 344 62 79*

Reply via email to