FW: BOUNCE airtoxics@great-lakes.net: Non-member submission from ["Cabrera-Rivera, Orlando - DNR" <Orlando.CabreraRivera@Wisconsin.gov>]

["Cabrera-Rivera, Orlando - DNR" <Orlando.CabreraRivera@Wisconsin.gov>]

Jon,

Thanks for the information. Apart from the issue of maintenance, ease of
use, deployment, etc. we also need to address the adequacy of Java vs.
.NET for programming the routines we want RAPIDS to perform. My
understanding is that the J2EE version, and .NET to some extent, had
some issues with applications that were memory intensive. I am not sure
about the new version of Java. This needs to be considered.       =20

I have talked to different people in our Program working on the
development of both Java and .NET applications. I am told that some
RAPIDS' utilities (given the old data model) might be best developed in
Java and some in .NET. In theory, one can integrate both. Of course,
that is in the case where both languages are supported. The people who
had reservations about Java were those who used the 2EE version. The
main concerns were the time it took to program, and the length of the
code, compare to .NET.
If the new version is to be used, some of the concerns may not apply.
=20
At this time, given the application support offered by the GLC and the
fact that we are in the designing stage, it may be best to go with Java
at this time, and see how things work out. The cost of programming may
be offset by the licensing and miscellaneous costs. =20

Orlando


=20



 =20


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-airtoxics@great-lakes.net
[mailto:owner-airtoxics@great-lakes.net] On Behalf Of Jon Dettling
Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2006 3:24 PM
To: 'Airtoxics'
Subject: RAPIDS programming language

Steering Committee,

It appears from our most recent discussion that we're fast approaching
the point of beginning some programming on the new RAPIDS software. This
will bring the discussion of whether the program the application in Java
of .Net to a head and is something that will need to be resolved no
later than the January 31 meeting, if not sooner.=20

To keep a track of the considerations that have been discussed, Pete and
I have compiled the attached summary. If people have additional comments
on what's included or more categories of consideration they'd like to
include, please send these to the group. This should be an item for
discussion on the next call (Jan 10th).

For many of the reasons highlighted in the attachment, the GLC continues
to be highly supportive of Java for this application. However, we
recognize that ours isn't the only vantage point to consider. If others
have factors that they believe should be considered and discussed in
making this decision, please let us know. I've attempted to capture the
points we've discussed so far in the attachment, although others are
free to modify these descriptions.

Happy holidays,=20

Jon

______________________
Jon Dettling
Great Lakes Commission
734-971-9135
dettling@glc.org
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
airtoxics is hosted by the Great Lakes Information Network:
http://www.great-lakes.net
To unsubscribe from this list: send mail to majordomo@great-lakes.net
with the command 'unsubscribe airtoxics' in the body of your message. No
quotes or subject line are required.
About : http://www.great-lakes.net/lists/airtoxics/airtoxics.info
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *