Mailing-List: contact dev-help@geronimo.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@geronimo.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (hermes.apache.org: local policy)
Date: Sun, 7 Nov 2004 19:47:31 -0500 (EST)
From: Aaron Mulder <ammulder@alumni.princeton.edu>
To: dev@geronimo.apache.org
Subject: External Deployment Plans, Web Services, and EARs
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0411071905221.8156@saturn.opentools.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

	So it looks like our EAR deployment plan can hold nested
deployment plans for all the modules within it, using the "any" area of
the module element in the geronimo-application.xml.
	I'm concerned that we may eventually want more than one nested
deployment plan per module.  For example, a module that uses web services
would have a separate web services DD.  Will we combine both the web
services and standard settings into one Geronimo plan, or would we have,
for example, a "Geronimo EJB" and "Geronimo Web Services" plan for the
same EJB JAR?
	In JSR-88, the API allows you to access each J2EE deployment 
descriptor separately, and provide server-specific DConfigBeans for it.
Each DConfigBean is tied to a specific DDBean (J2EE DD element), so it 
wouldn't really be possible for us to properly reflect the 
Geronimo-specific DD elements for both web services and standard J2EE 
modules without having separate DConfigBean trees for each.
	Still, we could take the two sets of DConfigBeans and merge them
somehow and write out a single deployment plan...  So we're not
necessarily tied to having separate files.

	Anyway, if we do think we'll want multiple deployment plans for
each module, we should probably change the EAR plan structure to take a
group of file name/any pairs instead of just a single any.

Aaron