Talk:Java Business Integration

Untitled

To whoever keeps adding links to StarThis.com: your products have nothing to do with JBI; please stop adding off-topic links. When your product supports JSR 208, such a link would be appropriate. Until then, please refrain from adding inappropriate links to this (or any other Wikipedia) article. Wikipedia is an encylopedia. See the Wikipedia List of policies for details.

References to SCA as an alternative to JBI are technically unfounded, and are the result of marketing "FUD". The Open SOA coalition, which includes many JBI authors, has published a white paper on this subject. The white paper declares that JBI and SCA are aligned with each other, and there is no reason SCA-based composite models cannot be executed atop a JBI-based run-time environment. An encyclopedia should be a repository of supportable facts, not marketing nonsense. Please keep the FUD/mud out of this article. --24.62.226.252 23:13, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think JBossESB is a JBI based ESB implementation at the moment. See http://jira.jboss.com/jira/browse/JBESB-3, all JBI related issues are targeted at Version 5.0, which is not already released, Current version is 4.2.1GA. Also see http://jira.jboss.com/jira/browse/JBESB-604. Can someone confirm this? 213.95.66.67 (talk) 08:29, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removed the following text from the article: "[feedback from a business person: please provide a more concrete explaination. It's too abstract. Thank you." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.171.133.191 (talk) 21:21, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This section is not really valid: "JBI implementations have not kept pace with commercial product Enterprise Service Bus offerings, as current JBI offerings lack support for modern parsers (DFDL and XMLNSC), efficient graphical development tools, and shifting development tasks from the developer to automation. [1]" First and foremost, "commercial product Enterprise service bus offerings"? As far as I know, Fuse ESB is a commercial ESB offering. Second, DFDL and XMLNSC are both IBM WebSphere Message Broker parsers. It does not make sense, it's pretty much the same as saying IBM WMB is not JBI compliant, and it is the best ESB out there. Third, The reference article is a very subjective wiki article and not really a good reference. Do you agree to delete this text? The core meaning, that current JBI implementations are not the market leading SOA platforms might however be relevant for the moment. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.209.206.145 (talk) 15:08, 29 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

JSR 312

JSR 312 has been withdrawn on 17 Dec 2010 according to http://jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=312. This may be worth noting in the article. 94.168.151.49 (talk) 19:43, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]