geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Chris Opacki <chris_opa...@yahoo.com>
Subject RE: J2EE deployment verifier
Date Mon, 11 Aug 2003 13:49:56 GMT
The deployemnt api is an extension for j2ee 1.3 and a
qill be a requirement for j2ee 1.4. I haven't read it,
but it may be true for the management api.

--- Srihari S <sriharis@blr.pin.philips.com> wrote:
> weston....your opinion...
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chris Opacki [mailto:chris_opacki@yahoo.com]
> Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 7:15 PM
> To: geronimo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: RE: J2EE deployment verifier
> 
> 
> exactly that.
> 
> --- Srihari S <sriharis@blr.pin.philips.com> wrote:
> > Correct me if i am wrong...based on the emerging
> > j2ee 1.4 stds any j2ee
> > server will have to use the deployment apis..
> > i mean the new javax.deployment apis...
> > my question is will the apis that ur suggesting
> end
> > up/can be adapted to
> > become an implementation of this javax.deployment
> > package?
> > I haven't started seeing this javax.deployment
> apis
> > spec...but just a
> > thought?
> > anyway we will have to write an implementation for
> > this pack also at some
> > point of time to get compliance..
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jonathan Duty [mailto:jduty@jonandkerry.com]
> > Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 6:32 PM
> > To: geronimo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > Subject: RE: J2EE deployment verifier
> > 
> > 
> > I would say we start out by designing an API that
> > gerinomo can use to
> > verify deployments.  Then we can build a stand
> alone
> > application around
> > that (basically put in a main function etc).
> > 
> > I know a few people were talking about building a
> > GUI interface to
> > Gerinomo for deployment/monitoring.  That may be a
> > good place to start
> > asking how they would like to integrate.
> > 
> > ~Jonathan
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Srihari S
> > [mailto:sriharis@blr.pin.philips.com]
> > Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 9:05 AM
> > To: geronimo-dev@incubator.apache.org;
> > weston_p@yahoo.com
> > Subject: RE: J2EE deployment verifier
> > 
> > never mind ur choice of words....if we end up
> using
> > the rule engine
> > concept
> > it will because of u:)
> > So at a very hi level we can look at the verifier
> as
> > 
> > 	Input 	Process 				Output
> > 
> > 	JAR		Verify the correctness 		OK/NOK with
> > error log
> > 	WAR		by parsing the DD
> > 	EAR		and applying correctness
> > 	RAR		rules
> > 
> > 
> > While it is true that the verifier can be a
> > standalone app and we must
> > design its internals in this spirit
> > it may also be worthwhile to decide early on how
> it
> > will get into the
> > geronimo frwk
> > 
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Weston M. Price [mailto:weston_p@yahoo.com]
> > Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 2:04 PM
> > To: geronimo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: J2EE deployment verifier
> > 
> > 
> > As a modular component I think this J2EE verifier
> > engine/processor would
> > be
> > very useful in a number of projects; it could even
> > be a standalone
> > module
> > that would allow a developer to validate their
> > archive before ever even
> > trying to deploy it in a target environment. Of
> > course, you wouldn't be
> > able
> > to see those 100+ line stack traces roll across
> your
> > tty when you go to
> > deploy your archive; that would be the one
> > drawback....
> > 
> > Regards,
> > 
> > Weston
> > 
> > On Monday 11 August 2003 08:26 am, Weston M. Price
> > wrote:
> > > Yeah, I knew that term was going to come back at
> > me, poor choice of
> > words
> > > on my part. I was basically thinking in terms of
> > "rules" as conditions
> > that
> > > need to be satisfied to fulfill a deployment;
> not
> > in terms of a full
> > blown
> > > rules engine (though this would be somewhat
> > interesting). At the very
> > core
> > > what you really have is a set of conditions that
> > when applied to a
> > > deployable unit (EAR, WAR, SAR etc) must be met
> > for the archive to be
> > > deployed. A verifier exists as sort of a
> watchdog
> > that prevents
> > archives
> > > from violating a discreet set of constraints.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Weston
> > >
> > > On Monday 11 August 2003 12:36 pm, Srihari S
> > wrote:
> > > > i did not have this rule engine picture when i
> > started thinking abt
> > this
> > > > verifier..
> > > > ru looking at the design of some open src rule
> > engines for designing
> > this
> > > > verifier?
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Weston M. Price
> > [mailto:weston_p@yahoo.com]
> > > > Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 12:12 PM
> > > > To: Srihari S;
> geronimo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > > > Subject: Re: J2EE deployment verifier
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > It's an interesting subject for a few reasons:
> > > > 	What we are really talking about is a type of
> > rules engine where
> > certain
> > > > conditions have to be met to achieve a
> > successful "deployment". The
> > most
> > > > intriguing aspect, at least to me, would be to
> > make this module
> > > > extensible and "forward looking" because we
> all
> > know that
> > specifications
> > > > are static and never change right? :-) As
> > Geronimo grows with J2EE
> > (and
> > > > all its associated specifications) the engine
> > would similarly have
> > to
> > > > grow as well and accommodate the new
> standards.
> > This could make for
> > some
> > > > interesting design and implementation
> decisions.
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > >
> > > > Weston
> > > >
> > > > Of course we all know that specification
> > requirements never change
> > right
> > > >
> > > > On Monday 11 August 2003 10:54 am, Srihari S
> > wrote:
> > > > > I agree with you Weston..this is a good
> 
=== message truncated ===


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com

Mime
View raw message