geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Weston M. Price" <westo...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: J2EE DeploymentManager ( was J2EE deployment verifier)
Date Wed, 13 Aug 2003 15:40:47 GMT
I second this!

Weston

On Wednesday 13 August 2003 04:49 pm, Labeeb Syed wrote:
> The primary issue I am concerned with is J2EE
> compliance. The Deploy component should be able to
> delegate certain methods to the Verifier component
> without a change in its own behavior. If we worry
> about the deployment manager later, it will be a lot
> more troublesome and cause some major confusion in
> terms of behaviour and responsibilty of the various
> methods. Do you guys think we can get by and address
> such issues later on?
> Secondly, there seems there will be an inherent
> overlapping of responsibilities within the components.
> I have run into such issues before and would like to
> avoid it altogether if possible. Sometimes you end up
> re-coding and re-designing the whole component. Also
> in the future someone else might be going through the
> code, it may make it more difficult to enhance, test
> or debug the components. If we strictly adhere to the
> spec, it will ensure better maintainability and
> longevity. This my opinion in regards to the two
> components.
>
> --- Chris Opacki <chris_opacki@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > It doesn't matter that much to me. I think we can
> > get
> > by with them separately. What does everyone else
> > think?
> >
> > --- Jonathan Duty <jduty@jonandkerry.com> wrote:
> > > Do you want the DDBeans to be part of this module?
> > > ~Jonathan
> > >
> > > Jonathan Duty
> > > Software Developer - eWashtenaw
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Chris Opacki [mailto:chris_opacki@yahoo.com]
> > >
> > > Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2003 11:59 AM
> > > To: geronimo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > > Subject: RE: J2EE DeploymentManager ( was J2EE
> > > deployment verifier)
> > >
> > > I would like to start implementing the DDBeans
> >
> > from
> >
> > > JSR-88. I will start a new thread for JSR-88.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- Srihari S <sriharis@blr.pin.philips.com>
> >
> > wrote:
> > > > cool...so what are we waiting for!!!!
> > > > lets get started with the requirements/design of
> > >
> > > the
> > >
> > > > verifier..
> > > > any ideas on the way of working for these
> >
> > phases..
> >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Jonathan Duty
> >
> > [mailto:jduty@jonandkerry.com]
> >
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2003 8:14 PM
> > > > To: geronimo-dev@incubator.apache.org;
> > > > weston_p@yahoo.com
> > > > Subject: RE: J2EE DeploymentManager ( was J2EE
> > > > deployment verifier)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I agree.  The verification engine really doesn't
> > > > need to implement the
> > > > deployment specs.  Later when we implement the
> > > > DeploymentManager in
> > > > front of it that's when we will have to worry
> > >
> > > about
> > >
> > > > implementing the
> > > > exact interfaces.
> > > >
> > > > ~Jonathan
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Jonathan Duty
> > > > Software Developer - eWashtenaw
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Weston M. Price
> >
> > [mailto:weston_p@yahoo.com]
> >
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2003 5:48 AM
> > > > To: geronimo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > > > Subject: Re: J2EE DeploymentManager ( was J2EE
> > > > deployment verifier)
> > > >
> > > > I agree with Srihari in that the Verification
> > > > manager does not have to
> > > > implement the spec interfaces, however, the
> > > > DeploymentManager does, this
> > > >
> > > > would be where we would implment DDRoot,
> >
> > DDConfig
> >
> > > > etc.....in some ways
> > > > the
> > > > DeploymentManager would just use the services of
> > >
> > > the
> > >
> > > > VerificatinoEngine
> > > > as
> > > > one step in the process of actual deployment.
> > > >
> > > > Is this in line with what you guys were
> >
> > thinking?
> >
> > > > On Wednesday 13 August 2003 01:52 pm, Jonathan
> > >
> > > Duty
> > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > When we implement this module, we could
> >
> > actually
> >
> > > > implement it to
> > > > exactly
> > > >
> > > > > follow the API specs (JSR 88).  That means
> > > >
> > > > implementing the
> > > >
> > > > > DeploymentManager interface on top of it and
> > >
> > > such.
> > >
> > > >  That way any
> > > >
> > > > > application (ant, Eclipse, etc) that is
> >
> > equipped
> >
> > > > to deploy packages
> > > >
> > > > > could interface with it.  It would just fall
> > >
> > > short
> > >
> > > > of actually
> > > >
> > > > > communicating with MBeans and deploying the
> > > >
> > > > package.
> > > >
> > > > > When this module is used internally (within
> >
> > the
> >
> > > > REAL deployment
> > > > manager)
> > > >
> > > > > it could just bypass or override the
> > > >
> > > > Verification's Deployment
> > > > manager.
> > > >
> > > > > ~Jonathan
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Srihari S
> > > >
> > > > [mailto:sriharis@blr.pin.philips.com]
> > > >
> > > > > Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2003 9:43 AM
> > > > > To: geronimo-dev@incubator.apache.org;
> > > >
> > > > weston_p@yahoo.com
> > > >
> > > > > Subject: RE: J2EE DeploymentManager ( was J2EE
> > > >
> > > > deployment verifier)
> > > >
> > > > > Hi All
> > > > >   When I was going thru the deployment api
> >
> > spec
> >
> > > I
> > >
> > > > thought it would be
> > > >
> > > > > good
> > > > > to bring up some points:
> > > > >
> > > > > From a preliminary reading of the spec i saw
> > >
> > > there
> > >
> > > > are no apis
> > > >
> > > > > explicitly
> > > > > designed to do the verification
> > > > > of a deployable unit. From this I infer that
> >
> > the
> >
> > > > verifier can be an
> > > >
> > > > > internal
> > > > > module which could be used
> > > > > by the deploy tool. So we could go full steam
> >
> > on
> >
> > > > its design and
> > > >
> > > > > implementation. In this regard I am trying to
> > > > > jot the list of checks that our verifier will
> > >
> > > have
> > >
> > > > to do (This is
> > > >
> > > > > mentioned
> > > > > in the j2ee specs).
> > > > > So in a way it will be equivalent to arriving
> >
> > at
> >
> > > > requirement specs for
> > > >
> > > > > the
> > > > > verifier.
> > > > > With the list of dos and donts that a verifier
> > >
> > > has
> > >
> > > > to achieve we could
> > > >
> > > > > go
> > > > > abt with design.Also the design of
> > > > > ant hooks can be taken care.Can we??
> > > > >
> > > > > Next is something abt the big picture.
> >
> > Certainly
> >
> > > > the verifer is a
> > > > small
> > > >
> > > > > part
> > > > > of the deployment process.
> > > > > But to achieve compliance we will have to
> > > >
> > > > implement the deployment
> > > > spec
> > > >
> > > > > as a
> > > > > whole. Has anyone given
> > > > > thought to this issue?
> > > > >
> > > > > regards
> > > > > Hari
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Weston M. Price
> > >
> > > [mailto:weston_p@yahoo.com]
> > >
> > > > > Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2003 1:33 AM
> > > > > To: geronimo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > > > > Subject: Re: J2EE DeploymentManager ( was J2EE
> > > >
> > > > deployment verifier)
> > > >
> > > > > No, I think splitting them up would be
> >
> > good....
> >
> > > > > Weston
>
> === message truncated ===
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
> http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com

Mime
View raw message