Hi Peter, On Jun 12, 2011, at 5:18 PM, P Teeson wrote:
> My situation is this: MacOS X 10.6.7 Xcode 3.2.6 MacPro dual 2.66Ghz > "Nehalem" quads, developing on Mac since 1984. > > But I've never had to do anything in WO, although I looked into it a few > years ago out of curiosity. > I'm now being asked to investigate some issues for a major organisation that > is having issues with an existing WO app. (see more below). > > Is there a website similar to CocoaDev or CocoaBuilder or the like where I > can easily search through the list archives WebObjects Developer List Archive: http://lists.apple.com/archives/Webobjects-dev WebObjects Deployment List Archive: http://lists.apple.com/archives/Webobjects-deploy > versus bothering this list? Feel free to 'bother' the list. This is the best resource out there for WebObjects developers. Many of us have been around for years, some count their time in decades. The Wiki is also incredibly useful, but there is a lot of out-of-date information since there isn't a true "owner" of the information. People try to update as they can, but there's a lot of stuff that just doesn't apply anymore because of the switch to open-source development tools, and because of the huge leaps forward that the Project Wonder frameworks provide over the base WebObjects frameworks. > Some of the questions I am seeking asnwers to (after doing some homework by > reading and Googling) are these: > > (1) WO is an application server WebObjects is a set of Frameworks for writing Web and Java-Client Applications. It isn't itself an Application Server, however it does come with wotaskd, which is a "simple" Application Server for running WebObjects applications. > now ported from Obj-C to Java Wow. That happened nearly a decade ago! > and made to run on the server version of MacOS X. Correct? Any platform that will run Java 1.4+ can run WebObjects. For a while, it was only "supported" on OS X, Solaris and Windows, and then later, briefly, only OS X, but now all platforms are considered equal for deploying applications on. > (2) The development tools are no longer Xcode based but are Eclipse based. > Correct? > So the Leopard Xcode WO SDK is of no use for development. Correct? Well, the the Leopard Xcode installer came with a copy of WebObjects and a bunch of support files and example scripts, but you don't need anything more than the WO Frameworks, Eclipse and the WOLips plugin to do WO development. Here's installation information: http://wiki.objectstyle.org/confluence/display/WOL/Install+WOLips+with+Eclipse+Update+Manager > (3) The client presently has a PPC Tiger server with WO connecting to a Sun > server running Oracle (don't yet know versions) > If they get new HW how can they upgrade to WO for Snow Leopard server? > Or is that possible? No. Snow Leopard does not run on PPC, only on Intel-based Macs. They don't need a server license either. The server tools that come with Snow Leopard don't include support any longer for WebObjects, so there really is no gain to be had by using server version of OS X for just WebObjects. > (4) It's my understanding that WO is now free for the asking/downloading. Is > that true? Where? How? Yes. Apple official installer: http://download.info.apple.com/Mac_OS_X/061-4634.20080915.3ijd0/WebObjects543.dmg Probably a better but more complicated way to install: http://wiki.objectstyle.org/confluence/display/WOL/Using+WOLips+With+Multiple+Versions+of+WebObjects > (5) What about Lion? I am guessing that the server version of Lion will run > WO? Correct? As long as Lion runs Java, It will will run WebObjects. Remember: WebObjects is pure Java. It runs _anywhere_ you can run Java. I've always developed on a Mac, but I've deployed to Mac, Linux and Windows (eesh). You can also deploy WebObjects apps as servlets that run in containers like Tomcat, but it requires additional work and most don't do it that way. > Because isn't it true that Apple uses it for their various online > stores? Correct? Yes, WebObjects is the backend for just about every web application Apple has, from the Apple Store, iTunes and App Store to in-house applications like the retail store's Concierge app and One-to-One. In 2009, one of the managers in change of WebObjects stated that every dollar that Apple makes flows through a WebObjects application. That's a lot of dollars. But, that's not to say that Apple doesn't use lots of other technologies too. Generally they use the best tool for the job. What tools they use for their various online stores and services, speaks volumes, even if it isn't being said directly. > (6) If (5) is true the implication seems to be that Apple is still > supporting/developing the framework in some fashion. > True the framework is fairly mature now "Fairly"?? It's been around since 1996 in one form or another. I don't think there's a single more mature set of tools out there for doing web application development. As cool as CoreData is, it's the kiddie pool compared to EOF, and that's saying something, because CoreData is _very_ cool. > (as is Cocoa with which I am more than a little familiar). WebObjects was the forerunner to Cocoa. If you spend more than a few minutes looking at WO code, you'll see the same conventions and patterns everywhere. If you know Java and Cocoa, then there's very little about WebObjects that you'll find hard to understand. > But there may be bug fixes and enhancements as time goes by. Any > statement by Apple about this? Nothing from apple other than what Pascal said. Do not count on there being new versions of WebObjects itself released by Apple. Project Wonder is the place where all new development is happening. There are several parts of Wonder that wouldn't be there if it had not been for Apple's support, but they are not an outwardly-active, direct, official participant in the community. With that said, they aren't the only source for improvements and bug fixes either. > (7) Oracle now owns Sun hence Java and does not provide the JVM for the MacOS > platform. http://openjdk.java.net/projects/macosx-port/ > This is left up to Apple and they do not appear to have a long term > commitment to Java. viz deprecation of the Java-Obj-C bridge. Ancient history. If you're going to point to something, point to the JVM being deprecated. But on that note, I guess Microsoft doesn't have a long-term commitment to Java either. Nor does Google, they don't write their own JVM either. Lack of a "commitment" to Java doesn't mean that Java lacks a "commitment" to Apple. If you've noticed, Apple seems to have a bit more weight to throw around these days on the desktop. > So is the life of WO threatened over say the next 5-years because of this? Life as a Java developer depending upon Apple to release updates to the JVM was frustrating. Apple was always months behind Sun with their releases. Apple and Sun have announced an OpenJDK Project for Mac OS X http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2010/11/12openjdk.html so the future of Java on OS X isn't really an issue. > TIA for your wise advice and for being kind enough to point me to places > other than > <http://wiki.objectstyle.org/confluence/display/WO/Home> The Wiki is a useful source of information, however some of the best info is unfortunately hard to find on there, and that is the #1 problem with WebObjects development right now. Dave > > respect.... > > Peter > _______________________________________________ > Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. > Webobjects-dev mailing list ([email protected]) > Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: > http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/webobjects%40avendasora.com > > This email sent to [email protected]
_______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Webobjects-dev mailing list ([email protected]) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to [email protected]
