geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Aaron Mulder <>
Subject RE: Geronimo Deployment Descriptors
Date Sun, 07 Sep 2003 22:11:09 GMT
On Sun, 7 Sep 2003, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
> I didn't call for a vote, just feedback on the approach.

	Fair enough.

> I also think its wrong to veto a change without having an alternative
> available - if I was changing something that already worked it would be
> different, but we didn't have anything.

	I disagree - I don't think you should "win by default" by putting 
something in the repository first.

> Applying that code would not get us to where we are now. It had loaders
> for the two different models, but nothing for matching them up and
> getting the data into a form where something like the
> ComponentContextBuilder could work on it. It was trying to add that
> stuff that made change approach.

	Yeah, but the JSR-88 code doesn't work for the new approach.  
You've just broken something *different*.  (Plus, as I point out below, 
you left the EJB POJOs working "the old way".)

> If you want to pursue that as an alternative, perhaps in conjunction
> with Greg's proposal for overlays, that would be cool.

	Well, are you going to fix the JSR-88 implementation?  I mean,
right now if you try to save Geronimo-specific customizations to an EJB
JAR, it writes the Geronimo stuff only, producing a tree of POJOs from
o.a.g.deployment.model.ejb, which if you look, doesn't even include the
stuff from ejb-jar.xml (i.e. an "Ejb" doesn't have an "ejb-class" field,
home & component interaces, etc.).

	Bottom line, it doesn't look to me like the "new approach" is any
more working than the old one!

> But let's not stop dead in the water while we debate.

	Okay.  Well, I put my thoughts on it out in an e-mail this 
morning (9:24), and I don't think you've replied to that yet...  In 
particular, what if we keep the files separate, but keep your proposed 
changes to the POJO structure, and something yet to be written does the 
combining of multiple files into a single POJO tree, so the file format 
is transparent to the ComponentContextBuilder?


View raw message