[TransWarp] PEAK 0.5a2

Phillip J. Eby pje at telecommunity.com
Mon Jul 7 17:42:10 EDT 2003

At 03:34 PM 6/20/03 -0400, Lateef Jackson wrote:

>It smells a lot more like J2EE than PEAK and is very Javaish.

My condolences.  ;)  Seriously, I find J2EE way more complex than it needs 
to be, mainly because it is excessively vendor-driven.  Specs with lots of 
"optional" bits are bad for interoperability.

>         Is there an ongoing conversation about Python Middleware? Is 
> there any
>conversation about a spec? Unfortunatly I think that the J2EE spec gets in
>way of devloping J2EE apps. However it keeps the options open for developers
>so that alone makes it worth it. A spec for Python Middleware writen by
>developers and not the Venders (specifically db venders) could be a really
>sweeeeeet spec.

PEAK defines plenty of interfaces; you could consider them a spec of 
sorts.  If you're thinking message-oriented middleware (ala JMS), you might 
hook up here with Ulrich Eck, who wants to develop some MOMish interfaces 
for PEAK.

More information about the PEAK mailing list