[Zope] Re: Zope XML Roadmap

[Joe Grace]

Paul,

I'm glad JPython based Zope is worth at least researching.  I definitely
need to do much "research" since Zope is my introduction to the web medium.

Paul Everitt wrote:

> Our position currently is pretty clear: servre-side Java is a bandwagon,
> but a pretty murky bandwagon.  Joining all the others in that market
> doesn't seem like an "obvious" thing to me.  Java still has a lot going
> against it (Microsoft, poor portability, speed) and so we're doing
> pretty well where we are now.

Zope is doing great, no doubt, but you guys don't seem to rest on your
laurels either, so I'll chime in with a slightly different perspective on
servlets!

I think servlets have (to everyone's surprise) turned out to be the initial,
most compelling use for Java.  Everyone expected the platform independence
to be the initial value-add of Java, but client-side Java was painful due to
(as you point out) portability issues... mainly irreconcilable (for Java1)
GUI differences.  While Java2 addresses the GUI issues with new
architecture, that whole issue was knottier than anyone imagined
(architecturally).

The great thing about servlets is that they only need to run on one machine
which is controlled by the servlet provider.  Zero portability problems.
Zero performance issues (since you can install HotSpot which is reasonably
fast, getting faster).  Apparently, servlets are incredibly rock solid for
servlet applications.  While certain aspects of Java (e.g., client-side
computing) are still currently murky, I believe what you were hearing about
servlets was that they're already here.  I suspect dovetailing with servlet
support would be a definitively good thing, enabling people to grab existing
(servlet) stuff and plug it into the awesome Zope framework hassle-free
(plus Python servlets as desired :-)

Also, supporting servlets naturally would eliminate any confusion that Zope
is competing with Java as a platform.  Java is so big and moving so fast,
that many would dismiss something "new" which isn't riding the Java train
(or isn't MS, I guess).  Zope is doing great, but the confusion is still
there.  (I just proved to myself yesterday that I could still run JavaScript
using Zope.  Technically, a no-brainer, but I wanted to make sure I hadn't
lost compatibility/options even if I don't necessarily need them now.  :-)
Java compatibility (servlets, applications, etc.) is a much bigger check-box
item for a lot of people.

> Server: Apache/1.2.5

Flux ;-).  Seriously, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.  I don't think
everything needs to run Java, just where convenient and compelling.

> Hmmm, do you feel like there is an onerous amount of C code without
> Python equivalents?

I don't know, just significant amounts of code.  I'm going on impressions
from reading the zope groups for the last 3+ months.  I remember a thread
that suggested JPython support was not immediately trivial.  Since
installing zope, I notice a significant number of C files.  IOW, I need to
do my "research", but I have a lot to learn about Zope before knowing well
what to research.

> Certainly, but I we'd also like to make sure about the goals of such an
> endeavor.  Are the goals speed, portability, integration (e.g. with
> servlets or as a bean), etc.?  Thus, while I'm not telling you to stop
> leaping, I'm also asking that you do some looking. :^)

Great.  Goal for me would be seamless integration of object models with Java
applications (servlets, beans, applets, etc.) to take advantage of Java
libraries/Zope power.  Leveraging 2 great technologies (Zope and Java) that
go well together.  Speed and hassle-free portability would be an ulterior
motive to take advantage of the Java VMs.

> I was at SPAM Houston for Jim Hugunin's first unveiling of those
> numbers.  He confessed that they were (a) quite speculative, being based
> on the speculative pystone test, (b) on the horizon, meaning not here
> yet, and (c) all done on MS' VM.  It was something like a five-fold drop
> when going back to the standard JDK.

Hmm, when was this unveiling?  The MS VM was the fastest for some time.
IBM's JDK1.1.8 VM and Sun's 1.2.x HotSpot VM are significantly faster than
it now.  I'd be surprised if there were a drop now at all.  I would expect a
speed up with either the latest IBM or the Sun.

> Perhaps HotSpot will address it, but when will it be available on Linux?
> On FreeBSD?  On Mac OS X Server?  On Digital Unix or SGI?

Good points.  I believe IBM has just released their JDK1.1.8 VM for Linux.
That may be a good solution for Linux (albeit not Java 2 yet).  Sun seems to
be dragging a bit with support for Linux though which is admittedly annoying
given the desirability of the JDK 1.2 support and speed of the Sun HotSpot
VM.

Apple seems to have no clue.  They can't seem even to announce JDK1.2
support even for Mac OS X (which is largely UNIX).  I don't know what
they're thinking.  They do have a solid (reportedly) 1.1.7+ VM now though.
So the basic Java is there.

FreeBSD, Digital Unix, and SGI, I don't know which probably means they have
nothing so far.

Your point is a good one.  Clearly, there needs to be a performance solution
where serious Java VM's are not available

> Having a CPython and JPython/Servlet version of Zope -- boy, that would
> certainly make Zope pretty unique!

:-)

Being able to choose between Python or Java, using an insanely great (sorry,
watched the Steve Jobs keynote last night :-) application server.  Yowza.  I
know I have to use Java, and it would be so nice to unite everything
(applets, server, scripting) into one incredible whole.

Cheers,

= Joe =

P.s., plus, Plus, I just think Java people would love Zope, but the lack of
servlet support and all the features Zope has just seem to put it into
competition with Java which can be confusing.  Building on Java just seems
so strong to me.