Re: Webfacing out, EGL in

Aaron Bartell wrote:

The cost of the development environment is at the bottom of the list for
me. At the top is retraining and restructuring to allow for a different/new
paradigm of application development and deployment.

Non-issue. You have to do this anyway, unless you continue to stay in the monolithic mindset.

No I am not saying
"Java is hard to learn" so let's not go there. I am mostly talking about
how the big and small details change with the adoption of EGL.

No harder than adopting any other UI.

For example,
I wouldn't consider configuring Apache and configuring WAS on the IBM i a
one-to-one relationship as far as complexity and ongoing maint. If you do
consider them equals concerning initial setup AND ongoing long term maint
then we will have to disagree.

Then we have to disagree. Even given the fact that a web server is a little more complicated than an HTTP server, it's not hard. As a percentage of total development time, WAS setup and configuration is insignificant. As soon as I get my PTFs, I'm going to create a brand new WAS server on my machine and install an EGL application. My guess is that it will take an hour. And it's a one-time cost, not an ongoing one. Once you have it configured properly, there's really little to do on a day-to-day basis.

That is just the tip of the iceberg of the
things that differ and need to be learned when adding a new
language/front-end.

Wait, what is your environment? How do you intend to do your web application? RPG-CGI? Then we're back to the fact that you have to learn HTML, Javascript, CSS, and all of that. Adding EGL into that mix is *TINY*. If this is your ongoing argument - that you can learn HTML, JavaScript and CSS, but EGL is too hard, then we really have no discussion point.

Joe