geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Aaron Mulder <>
Subject Re: online and offline deployment
Date Sun, 07 Nov 2004 22:23:18 GMT
On Sun, 7 Nov 2004, David Jencks wrote:
> I don't think "drop, wait & wonder" hot deployment should be supported.  
>   This only supports deployment of applications with embedded plans or  
> applications that need no plan. 

	I don't understand the objections to this.  "embedded plans" is 
the way every J2EE application I've ever seen has worked, save the days 
when WebSphere made you save your plan to DB2 instead of XML files.  Every 
tool in the space today puts your plans in the archive.

	Granted, the current J2EE leadership seems to think that no
application archive should contain server-specific information, but that
is not a standard, that is a paradigm shift.  Don't you think it will take
a long time before the average J2EE developer stops trying to pack their
server-specific deployment descriptor (or "deployment plan") into their
archives?  Refusing to support the by-far-most-common method of J2EE
packaging and deployment is IMHO only going to turn people off to the
product, even if you argue that it's "more correct".

	This is still a different issue than offline deployment, though, 
since a directory scanner would only work while the server was online.  As 
well, I'd be fine if the directory scanner declined to deploy anything 
without a Geronimo plan, or just produced errors along the lines of 
"unable to resolve reference to foo, please include a Geronimo deployment 
plan (geronimo-jetty.xml)"...


View raw message