Gang, There is a strong distributed tradition in the group of people here, yet unable to communicate the 'purpose' of River. Large companies look at Gigaspaces, pays good money for it and asked if liking Jini, most will go "Huh? Why would we use that?", mostly ignorant to the fact that Jini specs drove Gigaspaces into where it is.
At my company, we are doing evaluations of distributed technologies at the moment. Jini/River is not even on the map, because it "misses the points" that are our starting point. But an open source contender like Hazelcast is, because it delivers an 'starting point' which is easy to understand, i.e. a list of features as Distributed Map/Queue/Events/Executor/... expressed in terminology that we (the users) already know. So here is my modest suggestion for the Jini community; If you are as hot on distributed technology as you think you are, then start thinking in terms (and deliver a clear message) that matters to the users; * Full Resilience to failure possible, preferably expressed in SLA. * APIs expressed in well-known interfaces. * Avoid confusing the users with underlying tech * Packaged with reasonable defaults and ease of use. /me ducking for the flames. Cheers -- Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer http://www.qi4j.org - New Energy for Java I live here; http://tinyurl.com/3xugrbk I work here; http://tinyurl.com/24svnvk I relax here; http://tinyurl.com/2cgsug
