From dev-return-9842-apmail-geronimo-dev-archive=geronimo.apache.org@geronimo.apache.org Thu Nov 04 20:23:56 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-geronimo-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 32165 invoked from network); 4 Nov 2004 20:23:55 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 4 Nov 2004 20:23:55 -0000 Received: (qmail 1230 invoked by uid 500); 4 Nov 2004 20:23:46 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-geronimo-dev-archive@geronimo.apache.org Received: (qmail 1119 invoked by uid 500); 4 Nov 2004 20:23:45 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@geronimo.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Reply-To: dev@geronimo.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@geronimo.apache.org Received: (qmail 1065 invoked by uid 99); 4 Nov 2004 20:23:45 -0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (hermes.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [66.250.40.202] (HELO saturn.opentools.org) (66.250.40.202) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.28) with ESMTP; Thu, 04 Nov 2004 12:23:44 -0800 Received: by saturn.opentools.org (Postfix, from userid 500) id 9D9C73E5C; Thu, 4 Nov 2004 15:27:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by saturn.opentools.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99E50F5CB for ; Thu, 4 Nov 2004 15:27:18 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 15:27:18 -0500 (EST) From: Aaron Mulder X-X-Sender: ammulder@saturn.opentools.org To: dev@geronimo.apache.org Subject: Re: =?iso-8859-1?q?=5BApache_Geronimo_Wiki=5D_Updated=3A__WishList/M3?= In-Reply-To: <20041104200655.15345.97989@minotaur.apache.org> Message-ID: References: <20041104200655.15345.97989@minotaur.apache.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Virus-Checked: Checked X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N On Thu, 4 Nov 2004 scm@geronimo.apache.org wrote: > Would be nice to have "dump EAR here, it gets (re)deployed" directory > > +[jboynes] I really, really don't like this option. With the right > plugins to Ant/Maven (which I think +most projects would be using) it > should not +be any harder to distribute an application to the server > than it is to copy it into a directory. +By using a command the > developers/admin can see if the operation worked without scanning the > server +logs for errors. It also avoids all the problems with the > scanner hitting partially copied files, +race conditions between seeing > the module and the plan, being able to revert if it failed, and so > forth. + For what it's worth, I think you're arguing for correctness over convenience. While that's nice in admin tools, I'm not sure it's really a win for development tools, and certainly not for initially attempting to attract new developers. For what it's worth, I can't recall having a problem with Tomcat, JBoss or WebLogic where it processed a partially copied file or had a race condition or was unable to revert or it was unclear to me whether the application was successfully deployed (either you get big stack traces or you don't). So I think we can solve those problems. More importantly, the first time any J2EE developer sits down with a new server, I bet they try to deploy some app they have sitting around, and I bet they try to do it by dumping it in the deploy directory. Now we can teach them to use a tool instead, but I think in rejecting a hot deploy directory you're introducing a hurdle to adoption (must consult doucmentation and learn tool syntax and set up tool execution environment) because you don't like the standard process. But, all that said, I hope to make the deployment tool convenient enough that it's not a very big hurdle. Aaron