Mailing-List: contact geronimo-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: geronimo-dev@incubator.apache.org
From: "Srihari S" <sriharis@blr.pin.philips.com>
To: <geronimo-dev@incubator.apache.org>
Subject: RE: J2EE deployment verifier
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 19:15:57 +0530
Message-ID: <EFEDJOIJIJCOIPKLLGBJOEBACAAA.sriharis@blr.pin.philips.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: 
 <61F4105C0C90474182D5D03A205F70CE01D7B279@exchange.ewashtenaw.org>

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.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Weston
> > >
> > > On Monday 11 August 2003 05:03 am, Denes wrote:
> > > > Hi Folks,
> > > >
> > > > I'm intending to begin writing something for the deployment
verifier,
> > > > both to learn more about the specs and (hopefully) help with the
> > > > project.
> > > >
> > > > Some questions:
> > > >
> > > > 1.	Is there anybody working on this issue?
> > > > 2.	Will this be based on openEJB's deployment verifier?
> > > > 3.	Something that I never understood. As I don't have
commit
> > > > permission on cvs, to whom I should send patches/codes that I
create?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks
> > > > Denes