Mailing-List: contact geronimo-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: geronimo-dev@incubator.apache.org
From: "Jeremy Boynes" <jeremy@coredevelopers.net>
To: <geronimo-dev@incubator.apache.org>
Subject: RE: Geronimo Deployment Descriptors
Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2003 17:30:39 -0700
Message-ID: <002801c375a0$6e63d780$b625a8c0@ABU>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In-Reply-To: <3F5BB5E7.9020909@mortbay.com>
Importance: Normal

> From: Gmane Remailer [mailto:public@main.gmane.org] On Behalf 
> Of Greg Wilkins
> 
> Jeremy Boynes wrote:
> > I am reluctant to back out the current code as we don't have an 
> > alternative at this time and so other stuff that depends on 
> being able 
> > to load DDs will break. I suggest we stay with what we have 
> until an 
> > alternative is available and then restart this discussion then.
> 
> Using the "code is checked in" resolution to discussions is 
> not a good precident to set.
> 

The "I don't like what you did but don't have a working alternative" one
isn't either :-)

> Sorry but I really think that duplicating/ignoring the 
> standard descriptors is fundamentally *wrong* and we should 
> not move forward on that basis (not unless there is 
> significant support for the idea and it is me that is *wrong* :-)
> 
> I understand the problem you are trying to fix - but I think 
> this cure is worse than the disease.
> 
> As you say, any time you have two files you have a sync 
> problem. Thus your solution, having two files, does not avoid 
> the need for manual or tool based syncs - but having 
> duplicate content introduced the need for merge as part of 
> that sync process.
> 

If you turn the thought process around so that the 'merge' becomes
stripping all geronimo-namespace elements from the file, the sync is
trivial. It is much simpler than trying to merge the structure elements
of two partial files.


> We should use the one approach for all deployment descriptors 
> - so if we do decide to go this way, we will have to 
> duplicate the content of web.xml into geronimo-web.xml.  
> There are many many tools that generate and/or parse web.xml 
> and JSR88 is not going to replace them overnight.  Jasper for 
> one is going to continue parsing the web.xml file itself, so 
> this approch applied to webapps is going to be difficult.
> 

I don't see the problem here - if Jasper is using web.xml, then
a) generating it from a unified geronimo-web.xml is trivial
b) as all the geronimo elements are in a different namespace,
   it would be easy for Jasper to ignore them (if it doesn't
   already) 
c) you have already said you wanted to avoid duplicate parsing
   which would mean exposing the POJO model to Jasper. As the
   standard one is a generalization of the geronimo one, this
   should be simple.

> We need to write the geronimo-web.xml and web.xml handling 
> code.  I really do not want to duplicate/ignore the content 
> of web.xml and I don't want to use a different solution to 
> the other deployment descripts.
> 

I can probably get a simple loader done tonight - would that help?

--
Jeremy