Re: is it safe do adopt CORBA?

["marcelo.batera@gmail.com" <marcelo.batera@gmail.com>]

On May 18, 2:52 pm, Georg Bauhaus <bauh...@futureapps.de> wrote:

> For sure, CORBA wasn't intended to be a quick and dirty CGI successor.
> I think that SOAP is better in _this_ regard.

LMAO. I just love this list. (I know I'm not very much active in here
but I never got tired reading posts)

> > Also, we need efficiency (something SOAP doesn't
> > give us) and the possibility to interact with other languages (such as
> > Java) over the network (something annex e doesn't provide us) and even
> > the integration with the user's desktop (gnome uses intensively CORBA
> > in it's very core) is very tempting.

> Have you considered evaluating PolyORB?https://libre.adacore.com/polyorb/

Indeed. We're gonna use for sure PolyORB or ORBit-Ada.

> J2EE literature says that CORBA is too low level.

That's one of the reasons I don't like J2EE. Dealing with objects is
low level? But that deserves another topic.

> OTOH, I understand
> you want to make specialized business software?

Yes, but I think we might develop a generic framework first - just
like the ones easily found in the J* world but without the "create a
XML describing your interface, then a XML describing your service and
then a XML describing your database. Then you write the application
and hope it works in production environment" stuff.

Maybe it's gonna be just like JBoss used to be (a "software" that is
in fact several other software packed together in a somewhat organized
way).

I have some design ideas I'd love to share and discuss with everyone
on the list but they aren't mature enough for this yet.