geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Jencks <david_jen...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: The autodeploy feature in Geronimo
Date Mon, 24 Oct 2005 19:32:40 GMT

On Oct 24, 2005, at 12:24 PM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:

>
> On Oct 24, 2005, at 3:16 PM, Sachin Patel wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>>
>>> On Oct 24, 2005, at 1:05 PM, Joe Bohn wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> How about if we provide a "hot deploy" location that acts as an 
>>>> "addition/over-ride" location much the same as adding a library 
>>>> earlier in a path.  I tend to think of this "hot deploy" activity 
>>>> as a developer activity and so I think most folks running a 
>>>> production server would follow the traditional deploy, undeploy, 
>>>> redeploy mechanics.  Hot-deploy would most likely be used 
>>>> exclusively in development or to "patch" a critical problem with a 
>>>> temporary fix.
>>>>
>>> I only think of hot-deploy as a developer activity, and personally 
>>> would turn it off in production.
>>>
>>
>> Yes, this would definately not be a production tool.  For now I 
>> really think we just need something VERY simple.  Like David J. said, 
>> lets simply restrict the deployables to archives containing plans.  
>> This would eliminate unncessary complexity until further thought can 
>> be put into a solution that allows additional capability and be able 
>> to properly handle these scenarios.  We can make this as simple as we 
>> want or as complex as we want.  Lets start with something simple for 
>> now :)
>
> Fine.  But I don't think we need to think of this as being a part of 
> the core geronimo server.  Lets start it as a simple tool in devutils 
> that someone can choose to use...
>
> I think that's part of the problem here - we're thinking too deeply.  
> Lets just throw together a little webapp that hosts this 
> functionality.  Lets see how it works.
>
> I think I'll go start this now in devutils sandbox or something :)

Why do you want to make it a web app?  This implies it has a web GUI 
and makes it difficult to access gbeans.  I think you would make life 
simpler for everyone if you just wrote a gbean for this.  Sachin's 
design looks ok to me, but it needs replacement of the LGPL code in the 
patch.

thanks
david jencks

>
> geir
>
>
> -- 
> Geir Magnusson Jr                                  +1-203-665-6437
> geirm@apache.org
>
>


Mime
View raw message