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 20:11:15 GMT
I think it depends on what we want to do. I was
thinking we use a loader to grab our files and put
them in an object model...

Client code would then pass this object model to other
tools. 

I'm thinking this might be too far along in the
development lifecycle. I think we might want to start
with use cases.

we need to figure out exactly what the tool(s) will
do.

we need to figure out dependencies at a high level.

hmmm.... it may be a good idea to set up a twiki page
for these modules.

I think it be best that everyone might want to start
diving into specifications before talking too much
about one thing.

The loads of replies are getting hard to track.


--- denes@ppgia.pucpr.br wrote:
> I vote to place the verifier and Deploy Tool in
> separate modules. IMO the 
> verifier is only one module that will run inside
> Deploy Tool. The verifier also 
> should run outside the deploy tool (as a ant task,
> for example).
> 
> I`m worried too that we are ready to mount on
> horses, but not because we are 
> ready to do that, but because I think that we still
> not sure about where we are 
> going...
> 
> I wish we could discuss some more about how the
> Loader and the Verifier could 
> interact. That part is really not clear to me. Is
> the verifier receive a ear 
> file and send the xmls to the loader to obtain the
> info, or the loader will 
> callback the verifier to validate the classes that
> it reads?
> 
> Denes
> 
> 
> Citando Chris Opacki <chris_opacki@yahoo.com>:
> 
> > I count three important pieces for the moment...
> > 
> > .. Verifier
> > .. Loader - CASTOR or JAXB - Build the
> DDBeans..etc..
> > .. Deploy Tool
> > 
> > Do we want to place the Verifier and Deploy Tool
> in to
> > separate modules? Is anyone out there suppose to
> be
> > the project champion? I'm just worried that we are
> all
> > getting ready to mount or horses. 
> > 
> > I still think it would be good to share the DD
> Beans.
> > 
> > Wish I didn't have to do real work! This is
> definitely
> > more compelling.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > --- "Weston M. Price" <weston_p@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > I guess first and foremost, 
> > > 	
> > > IMO
> > > 
> > > Let's have fun with this module...man, we have
> > > banged around on this list all 
> > > day and I believe we have really worked out some
> > > excellent ideas. I know I 
> > > have gained a great deal by just being
> > > involved...but let's not forget, we 
> > > are supposed to enjoy doing this, this is Apache
> > > right? Verification and 
> > > deployment are two of the most un-sexy ideas in
> > > J2EE, in fact, next to Java 
> > > IO (prior to NIO) I can't think of anything more
> > > dull....well, save for maybe 
> > > the Boston RedSox..(sigh, ignore
> that)...However, I
> > > am pretty pumped about 
> > > this.....I get to develop code with smart
> engaging
> > > personalities (some that 
> > > get up before noon) and just have a blast....so,
> > > let's just take it step by 
> > > step and see what comes up....I have already
> heard
> > > about a million ideas that 
> > > are great....the basic module structure could
> use
> > > some comments...so let's 
> > > just role with it...
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Regards,
> > > 
> > > Weston
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On Monday 11 August 2003 07:33 pm,
> > > denes@ppgia.pucpr.br wrote:
> > > > Agreed. I`m not familiar with maven yet.
> > > Definitively needs help on that...
> > > >
> > > > About planning: I think that all of us agreed
> that
> > > the deployment verifier
> > > > will have to be a component: it will have to
> > > receive the ear file from
> > > > somewhere and do all the tasks without any
> help of
> > > external entities. This
> > > > way, it can be placed in the client GUI, in
> the
> > > server, we can create an
> > > > ant task for it, and so on.
> > > >
> > > > Some thoughs about the verifier:
> > > >
> > > > 1. It should have an interface for rules. This
> > > interface will allow each
> > > > rule implemented in a distinct class (several
> > > rules can be implemented in
> > > > the same class either). Not sure about
> performance
> > > issues yet, but IMO this
> > > > is the best that can be done to make sure that
> new
> > > rules added/removed from
> > > > specs will be promptly integrated into
> verifier.
> > > I'm thinking in Chain of
> > > > Responsability to manage the rules, but each
> rule
> > > will have to say about
> > > > what domain it`s related (home interfaces
> rules,
> > > local interfaces rules,
> > > > session rules and so on). One "class rule" can
> be
> > > related to more than one
> > > > domain. This will speed up the process, as the
> > > verifies asks only the rules
> > > > related to the domain that it`s verifying at
> > > moment;
> > > >
> > > > 2. It should have an interface for expressing
> > > rules violations, like
> > > > ActionError on Struts. This interface should
> allow
> > > to query about what
> > > > section was violated, the message related to
> the
> > > error (with i18n for sure
> > > > ;) ), the offendind class and so on. This way,
> any
> > > tool that want to use
> > > > the validator can get the error lists and
> > > manipulate them as they want; IMO
> > > > this is better than exceptions because we can
> > > generate several violations
> > > > at once and is better that string messages
> because
> > > gives more flexibility.
> > > >
> > > > 3. The validator will have to read the
> > > application.xml and ejb-jar.xml
> > > > files to do the job (specific deployment files
> > > like jboss.xml would be
> > > > interesting but have to be integrated in a
> really
> > > modular way). The point
> > > > is that the server will have to read these
> file as
> > > well to startup the
> > > > application. So, the reader should be placed
> in a
> > > common lib. Do anyone
> > > > knows if jakarta already have this
> implemented?
> > > >
> > > > 4. If we will write the XMLs readers decribed
> > > above, does everyone agrees
> > > > in using JAXB?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Cheers,
> > > > Denes
> > > >
> > > > Citando Jonathan Duty <jduty@jonandkerry.com>:
> > > > > Great.  Lets get a maven project stub
> generated
> > > and get started.  Any
> > > > > ideas for planning?
> > > > >
> > > > > ~Jonathan
> > > > >
> > > > > Weston M. Price wrote:
> > > > > >Right on dude....
> > > > > >
> > > > > >You nailed it....especially in terms of the
> > > relationship between the
> > > > > >controller and the two...well at this point
> we
> > > will call them
> > > > >
> > > > > services....The
> 
=== message truncated ===


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

Mime
View raw message