geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Jencks <>
Subject Re: Please Vote: 1 deployment tool or 2?
Date Tue, 26 Oct 2004 02:58:07 GMT
At the moment I have a slight preference for 2 tools, mostly because I 
can't imagine an implementation of one tool that didn't consist of 2 
entirely separate implementations inside.

Being addicted to maven I doubt I would use either one very much:-)

david jencks

On Oct 25, 2004, at 7:44 PM, Aaron Mulder wrote:

> 	I only got one vote on this, and it wasn't from a committer.
> Please everyone take a look and send along your vote.
> Thanks,
> 	Aaron
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 14:46:41 -0400 (EDT)
> From: Aaron Mulder <>
> Reply-To:
> To:
> Subject: Vote: 1 deployment tool or 2?
> 	It looks like we'd like to have a command-line deployment tool
> with JSR-88 features.  This would be aimed at providing hot deploy and
> start/stop and other JSR-88 features, as well as operating on remote
> servers.  It could use the same logic as the Maven plugin or otherwise,
> I'm not concerned about the implementation yet.  The question is:
>  [  ] Add these features to the existing bin/deployer.jar tool
>  [  ] Create a new bin/xyz.jar tool with only these features, so we
>       have an "offline" deployer and a "JSR-88" or "J2EE" deployer.
> 	The advantage to the unified tool is that you'd have one deployer
> tool for any scenario.  One command to remember, etc.
> 	There are a couple advantages to having separate tools:
>  * If combined into one tool, the help would need to be rewritten to 
> make
>    the 2 usage modes clear.  For example, JSR-88 can't handle creating 
> a
>    CAR or executable/classPath information, while the current deployer
>    can't handle start/stop/undeploy/etc.  Also there would need to be
>    substantial syntax checking to avoid mixing parameters from 
> different
>    modes.  It seems unfortunate that a lot of the command line 
> arguments
>    would clash with each other.
>  * The code for a unified tool would need to decide how to operate 
> based
>    on the mode, and some operations (install/distribute) would need two
>    code paths for the same operation, making it harder to have clean 
> code.
>  * The JSR-88 features of a combined tool might work against other 
> servers
>    (given an appropriate plugin), but the other features would not, 
> which
>    would also need to be clarified.
>  * The current deploy tool would not depend on JSR-88, making it 
> possible
>    to have a more compact Geronimo distribution with a functional
>    deployer, granted without remote deploy or other JSR-88 features.
> 	Anyway, please vote.
> Thanks,
> 	Aaron

View raw message