geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Srihari S" <sriha...@blr.pin.philips.com>
Subject RE: J2EE deployment verifier
Date Mon, 11 Aug 2003 13:59:45 GMT
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
> staarting point to gain
> > >
> > > familiarity
> > >
> > > > with the specs
> > > > Count me in too.:))
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Weston M. Price
> [mailto:weston_p@yahoo.com]
> > > > Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 12:01 PM
> > > > To: geronimo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > > > Subject: Re: J2EE deployment verifier
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I think this would actually be quite
> interesting to work on. Man,
> if
> > > > there is
> > > > a way to become familiar with the J2EE
> specs....this is it!
> > > >
> > > > If you wanted someone to work with on this I
> would be happy to
> help.
> 
=== message truncated ===


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


Mime
View raw message