Re: [Fwd: Re: [VOTE] [Discuss] P5EE without Repository and Widget]

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