We are about to take on a large project implemented in Grails (2.3.7). The application makes heavy use of many different (end-points as well) REST-ful webservices. We are of course interested in using what is considered to be "best standards" (at least currently).
We are currently considering:
- Using the Groovy HTTP-builder
- Using the "REST Client builder" plugin
Any other we should consider and what are your experiences using the above mentioned?
I have used both http://grails.org/plugin/rest and http://grails.org/plugin/rest-client-builder and both provide a nice wrapper around HTTP Builder library. The "rest" plugin provides dynamic methods for you if you like using that syntax. I prefer REST client builder though. Both are easy to work with.
Can Drools be used with non-Java applications? Most examples that I've seen are in conjunction with Drools interfacing with Java applications.
EDIT: Looks like http://docs.jboss.org/drools/release/5.5.0.Final/droolsjbpm-integration-docs/html_single/ describes the Drools API on techniques on getting information in and out of Drools.
I would suggest to expose the functionality that you need from Drools via REST or SOAP and interact with it from your application using that. I wouldn't spend time checking the Drools .NET port is old and out of dated.
A JS implementation is a good idea.. but just for specific cases.. you don't want your whole business rules running on the client side.. (for a web app of course).
HTH
Well, it doesn't have to be Java, but it does have to be a JVM language (I've used Groovy in the past with Drools). Even then, there's nothing to prevent you from calling a REST service, for example, when a rule fires, and interacting with another system that way.
That said, there are other rules engines in other languages. I believe there is a .NET Drools port, and a Javascript implementation.
Let's say I have some service that talks over ZeroMQ sockets, and I want to provide access to that service to a single-page web application. I'd like the web app to talk to a service that provides a REST API (for control and queries) and WebSockets (for monitoring), and which does this by talking ZeroMQ to the first service. I'd like to write this in Scala.
What options are available to me for building that second service?
A very integrated solution would be to use Akka/Play2 for this.
Akka would be the core component talking to the ZeroMQ socktes via akkas ZeroMQ Module, which gives you a nice Scala-API and Akka/Actor integration. This Akka/Actor system can than be accessed via HTTP/WebSockets by using either play-mini or play2 which mainly differ in the style of defining HTTP endpoints.
For REST API I would recommend Spray - a nice library with a very concise and flexible DSL for defining web services. We've integrated Spray into our current project and are pretty happy with it. As for play-mini, AFAIK, it depends on the entire play2 project, so you'll end up with a lot of stuff you don't need.
We currently have an application that is based on an in-house developed workflow engine with YAML based DSL. We are looking to move parts of it to Java.
I have discovered a number of java solutions like Intalio, JBPM, Drools Expert, Drools Flow etc.
They appear to be aimed at businesses where the business analyst creates the workflows using a graphical editor and submits them to the workflow engine. They seem geared towards ease of use for non-technical people rather than for developers with a focus on human interaction.
The workflows tend to look like.
Discover-a-file -\
-> join -> process-file -> move-file -> register-file
Discover-some-metadata -/
If any step fails we need to retry it X times. We also need to be able to stop the system and be able to restart it and have it continue from where it was (durable).
Some of our workflows can be defined by a set of goals we need to achieve so Jess's backwards rule chaining sounds interesting but it is not open source.
It might be that what we are after is a Finite State Machine engine or just an Enterprise Service Bus and do everything as JMS queues.
Is there a good open source workflow engine that is both standards-based but also geared towards developers. We don't particular want to use a graphical workflow designer or write reams of XML and it should ideally be in Java or language agnostic (makes REST/Soap calls to external services).
Thanks,
Tom
Both Activiti and Bonita are open source and standard based (BPMN2). See for example this blog post.
Ruote is not standard based but seems close to your DSL approach and runs on a JVM thanks to JRuby.
Intaloi an open source BPM engine it offers a BPMN-support Designer and a BPEL engine. it's written in Java.
Camunda BPM is a developer-friendly Open Source workflow engine that is based on the open standards BPMN 2.0, DMN 1.1 and CMMN 1.1.
While it does come with a comfortable graphical workflow designer it also ships with a fluent API to build workflows programmatically. Camunda is written in Java, but can also be invoked from other languages via its REST API and it can make REST/Soap calls to external services.
jBPM 5 (open source, ASL, BPMN2) is just released and it's the best of Drools Flow and jBPM 4. It's lightweight but it can also integrate deeply with the Drools rule engine to make decisions.
For anyone looking for Python based enterprise grade solution.
Zengine, is GPL3 BPMN workflow based framework with Tornado, Rabbit AMQP, advanced permissions, extensible scaffolding features and more.
Built on top of following major components;
SpiffWorkflow: Powerful workflow engine with BPMN 2.0 support.
Tornado: Tornado is a Python web framework and asynchronous networking library.
Pyoko: Django esque ORM for Riak KV store.
RabbitMQ: Fast, ultrasharp AMQP server written with legendary Erlang lang.
My question is very simple, my intention is to generate a repository with your responses so it could serve to the community when selecting frameworks for developing enterprise general purpose applications.
This could apply very well for general purpose languages such as C++, C# or Java.
What Framework do you recommend for generating Layered Architectures?
Based on you experience why do you prefer the usage of some Framework versus your own architecture?
How long do you believe your selected Framework will stay as a preferred option in the software development industry?
This is indeed an overly general question, especially since there are so many interpretations of the very word framework, and within the world of frameworks many different kinds for different tasks. Nevertheless, I'll give it a shot for Java.
Java
Java EE
The default overall enterprise framework of Java is called Java EE. Java EE strongly emphasis a layered architecture. It's a quite large framework and learning every aspect of it can take some time. It supports several types of applications. Extremely small and simple ones may only use JSP files with some scriptlets, while larger ones may use much more.
Java EE doesn't really enforce you to use all parts of it, but you pick and choose what you like.
Top down it consists of the following parts:
Web layer
For the web layer Java EE primarily defines a component and MVC based Web Framework called JSF - JavaServer Faces. JSF utilizes an XML based view description language (templating language) called Facelets. Pages are created by defining templates and letting template clients provide content for them, including other facelets and finally placing components and general markup on them.
JSF provides a well defined life-cyle for doing all the things that every web app should do: converting request values, validating them, calling out to business logic (the model) and finally delegating to a (Facelets) view for rendering.
For a more elaborate description look up some of the articles by BalusC here, e.g. What are the main disadvantages of Java Server Faces 2.0?
Business layer
The business layer in the Java EE framework is represented by a light-weight business component framework called EJB - Enterprise JavaBeans. EJBs are supposed to contain the pure business logic of an application. Among others EJBs take care of transactions, concurrency and when needed remoting.
An ordinary Java class becomes an EJB by applying the #Stateless annotation. By default, every method of that bean is then automatically transactional. Meaning, if the method is called and no transaction is active one is started, otherwise one is joined. If needed this behavior can be tuned or even disabled. In the majority of cases transactions will be transparent to the programmer, but if needed there is an explicit API in Java EE to manage them manually. This is the JTA API - Java Transaction API.
Methods on an EJB can easily be made to execute asynchronous by using the #Asynchronous annotation.
Java EE explicitly supports layering via the concept of a separate module specifically for EJBs. This isolates those beans and prevents them from accessing their higher layer. See this Packaging EJB in JavaEE 6 WAR vs EAR for a more elaborate explanation.
Persistence layer
For persistence the Java EE framework comes with a standard ORM framework called JPA - Java Persistence API. This is based on annotating plain java classes with the #Entity annotation and a property or field on them with #Id. Optionally (if needed) further information can be specified via annotations on how objects and object relations map to a relational database.
JPA heavily emphasizes slim entities. This means the entities themselves are as much as possible POJOs that can be easily send to other layers and even remote clients. An entity in Java EE typically does not take care of its own persistence (i.e. it does not hold any references to DB connections and such). Instead, a separate class called the EntityManager is provided to work with entities.
The most convenient way of working with this EntityManager is from within an EJB bean, which makes obtaining an instance and the handling of transactions a breeze. However, using JPA in any other layer, even outside the framework (e.g. in Java SE) is supported as well.
These are the most important services related to the traditional layers in a typical enterprise app, but the Java EE framework supports a great many additional services. Some of which are:
Messaging
Messaging is directly supported in the Java EE framework via the JMS API - Java Messaging Service. This allows business code to send messages to so-called queues and topics. Various parts of the application or even remote applications can listen to such a queue or topic.
The EJB component framework even has a type of bean that is specifically tailored for messaging; the message driven bean which has a onMessage method that is automatically invoked when a new message for the queue or topic that the bean is listening to comes in.
Next to JMS, Java EE also provides an event-bus, which is a simple light-weight alternative to full blown messaging. This is provided via the CDI API, which is a comprehensive API that among others provides scopes for the web layer and takes care of dependency injections. Being a rather new API it currently partially overlaps with EJB and the so-called managed beans from JSF.
Remoting
Java EE provides a lot of options for remoting out of the box. EJBs can be exposed to external code willing and able to communicate via a binary protocol by merely letting them implement a remote interface.
If binary communication is not an option, Java EE also provides various web service implementations. This is done via among others JAX-WS (web services, soap) and JAX-RS (Rest).
Scheduling
For scheduling periodic or timed jobs, Java EE offers a simple timer API. This API supports CRON-like timers using natural language, as well as timers for delayed execution of code or follow up checks.
This part of Java EE is usable but as mentioned fairly basic.
There are quite some more things in Java EE, but I think this about covers the most important things.
Spring
An alternative enterprise framework for Java is Spring. This is a proprietary, though fully open source framework.
Just as the Java EE framework, the Spring framework contains a web framework (called Spring MVC), a business component framework (simply called Spring, or Core Spring Framework) and a web services stack (called Spring Web Services).
Although many parts of the Java EE framework can be used standalone, Spring puts more emphasis on building up your own stack than Java EE does.
The choice of Java EE vs Spring is often a religiously influenced one. Technically both frameworks offer a similar programming model and a comparable amount of features. Java EE may be seen as slightly more light-weight (emphasis convention over configuration) and having the benefit of type-safe injections, while Spring may offer more of those smaller convenience methods that developers often need.
Additionally Spring offers a more thoroughly and directly usable security API (called Spring Security), where Java EE leaves a lot of security details open to (third party) vendors.
To specifically answer the second question:
Developing your own framework gives you the burden of having to maintain it and educating new developers in using it.
The larger your framework becomes, the more time you have to devote specifically to it and the less time you thus have to solve your actual business problem. This is okay if your business problem is the framework, but otherwise it can become a bit of a problem, even for very large companies that can dedicate a group of people to such a framework.
If you're a smaller company (say ~15 developer max) this can really become a huge burden.
Additionally, if your own framework is the kind of framework that can take advantage of third party developments (e.g. third parties can develop components for JSF), then your own framework obviously won't be able to take advantage of that.
Unless of course you open source your own framework, but this will only significantly increase the burden of supporting it. Just dumping your source code on sourceforge does not really count. You will have to actively support it. All of a sudden your framework becomes their framework with maybe 'weird' feature requests and awkward error reports for environments that you have no personal interest in.
This also assumes that your framework will actually be used by external users. Unless it's really very, very, good and you put lots of energy in it, this will probably not happen if it's simply the umpteenth Java web- or ORM framework.
Obviously, some people have to take up the job of creating new frameworks, otherwise the industry just stagnates, but if your prime concern is your business problem I would really think twice of starting your own framework.
Very vague question, I'm not really sure it's ever a good idea to "write your own" at this point for a work project (unless writing your own, IS the project). If it's a learning exercise, fine, but otherwise go use one of the libraries written by people who have been doing it far longer. If you really want to get involved, read their code, try and contribute patches etc.
For .Net there is Sharp Architecture Which is a pretty popular framework for layered applications.
Here's some of the stuff I use (I don't use Sharp Architecture)
First, the infrastructure stuff
For Dependency Injection, I use StructureMap. I use it because it's way more robust and performant than anything I would or could write, and it's very well supported within the .Net community. It also sticks to being DI, and doesn't venture out into other things that I might want to use other libs for (AOP etc). The fluent configuration is fantastic (but many .Net DI Tools have that now)
For AOP, I use Linfu Dynamic Proxy. I know a lot of people that like the code weaver variety for performance reasons, but that's always seemed a bit like premature optimization to me.
For a DataMapper, I use AutoMapper. This is one where I'm on again off again. If you can do your mappings based just on convention, then great, I'll use it. Once I have to start tweaking the configuration to do special things.... to me that starts to get into the gray area where the code might be more clear with just some left=>right wrapped in a function.
Web/UI
Asp.Net MVC. Although to be quite honest, I'm having a falling out lately and may soon be moving to FubuMvc. Asp.Net MVC seems like it has split personalities in terms of API design (dynamic over here, static over there, using blocks to render forms, but System.Actions to render other things etc). Combine that with the fact that it's not really OSS (you can't submit a patch), and to me there's a compelling reason why the community should come up with something better that's OSS.
Persistence
NHibernate, Specifically Fluent NHibernate. Sure I'd love to write my own OR/M, but at the same time I'm certain that the hordes of developers who have worked on NHibernate are way smarter than me.
Services/Distribution etc
WCF for Synchronous calls
NServiceBus for Messaging and most async calls.
Most of this stuff is OSS, so how long will it be around, well, I would imagine a good long while.
This question doesn't work very well. Selecting frameworks is difficult, and very context specific. For each selection process you might end up with a simple shortlist and a simple list of questions to answer, but those lists do not transfer well to other selections.
The number of parameters and the parameter sensitivity influencing a decision is very large, and at enterprise level a lot of them are not technical.
Currently, there are no frameworks available that are ready to support these near-term enterprise needs:
the switch for most of the workforce from pc to tablet and phone;
the switch from web client and rdbms to p2p/disconnected based storage and distribution