Mailing-List: contact dev-help@geronimo.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@geronimo.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (hermes.apache.org: local policy)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v619.2)
In-Reply-To: <424B40D7.1050107@apache.org>
References: <cdbf46a8c1663c161aaa13311eaa46b8@gluecode.com>
 <424B40D7.1050107@apache.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed
Message-Id: <2a42a8a23ff830e15e2cb566314afe59@gluecode.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Dain Sundstrom <dsundstrom@gluecode.com>
Subject: Re: Two deployment tools
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 18:20:24 -0800
To: dev@geronimo.apache.org

Sounds close, but I was proposing that we have a bootstrap version that  
we use to build the first few jars and configurations.  Are you planing  
on supporting installation into a raw "cold" config store directory?   
In this case we couldn't possibly have a running server yet (since we  
are still building it :)

-dain

--
Dain Sundstrom
Chief Architect
Gluecode Software
310.536.8355, ext. 26

On Mar 30, 2005, at 4:14 PM, Jeremy Boynes wrote:

> This sounds like the geronimo-packaging-plugin:
>
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/trunk/plugins/geronimo- 
> packaging-plugin/
>
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/geronimo-dev/200503.mbox/ 
> %3c423E7ADB.40303@apache.org%3e
>
> I'm nearly finished with the next set of changes which includes  
> support for packaging any type of module.
>
> --
> Jeremy
>
> Dain Sundstrom wrote:
>> Aaron,
>> A while back we had a discussion about one vs. two deployment tools.   
>> IIRC, you wanted two tools because the command line options for the  
>> "package" command did not fit well into JSR88, and I thought having  
>> multiple deploy tools would be confusing.  After working with the  
>> deploy code and thinking about the problem, I have come to the  
>> conclusion that you were right and *I was wrong*.
>> I think we should break out the package command and merge it with the  
>> bootstrap deployer to create a new tool that is only available via  
>> maven and which we use to bootstrap our server during assembly.  This  
>> tool would only be capable of deploying service plan files, and could  
>> either create an executable jar or an entry in a local config store.   
>> In addition, I think the tool should let us specify an ant style  
>> manifest, so we can remove all the funky arguments to the deploy  
>> command that creates a manifest.  This new tool could considerably  
>> speed up the assembly process.
>> What do you think?
>> -dain
>> -- 
>> Dain Sundstrom
>> Chief Architect
>> Gluecode Software
>> 310.536.8355, ext. 26