geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Aaron Mulder <>
Subject Re: Remote Deployment
Date Tue, 01 Nov 2005 18:04:14 GMT
On 11/1/05, Dain Sundstrom <> wrote:
> Guys, I think we are getting a little to far ahead of Aaron's
> proposal.  Having a servlet to do remote deployment would be a huge
> step forward for Geronimo, given that remote deployment currently
> doesn't work.  Sure in the future it would be nice to support remote
> deployment with out requiring a web container and more granulized
> update support, but for now how about get the basics working?

Right -- the challenge is the same regardless of what application it
ends up in.  But my intention is to support deployment from anything
that can speak JSR-88, be it command-line, IDE, etc.

> Why does the console have a different name in Tomcat and Jetty?

I assume so it can be deployed to both at the same time.  But the
truth is, I'm not sure, I wasn't the one who made it that way.  :)

> Also, will this be a pure http(s) deployment tool or will the tool
> use both the JMX-RMI and http(s) protocols?  I would prefer a pure
> http client so it can work in the maximum environments?

Well...  That's possible too but it would make the servlet more
complex.  I'd prefer to start by running everything the way we do
right now except for offloading the file upload.  After that, we can
try to put the rest of the protocol into HTTP(s).  For what it's
worth, any of these changes should be invisible to a JSR-88 client,
save perhaps some change to the connect URL.


> On Nov 1, 2005, at 6:53 AM, Sachin Patel wrote:
> > Please keep in mind the tooling scenarios for this as well.
> >
> > I would eventually like like to see some type of granulized update
> > support.   For example, if a user is developing a large application
> > and testing on a remote server, if a single file in a module is
> > changed, it would be quite an overhead for the entire application
> > to have to be repackaged and sent over the network.  We need to
> > think about being able to send partial updates to a remote server.
> >
> > Sachin
> >
> > Joe Bohn wrote:
> >
> >> +1
> >> I was thinking the same thing.  If implemented as a servlet it
> >> should be independent of the console.   What is used for local
> >> deploy should be the same as remote deploy.
> >> Joe
> >> Dave Colasurdo wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Aaron Mulder wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Forget about multiple web containers.  The issue is, I know
> >>>> there's a
> >>>> servlet o.a.g.RemoteDeployerServlet running in some web app in
> >>>> Geronimo.  What is the URL to contact it?  To start with, you
> >>>> need to
> >>>> determine which web application it's in (since we already use
> >>>> different names for the console for Jetty/Tomcat you can't just
> >>>> hardcode a name), and then you need to determine what the URL is to
> >>>> access that web application, which means inspecting its list of
> >>>> connectors.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Is remote deployment unique to the web console?  Shouldn't remote
> >>> deployment also be possible from the command line or
> >>> programatically via JMX.  Projects/products that embed Geronimo
> >>> may wish to remove the web console altogether in an attempt to
> >>> use G as a hidden embedded server for their application with only
> >>> their preset configurations.
> >>>
> >>> Perhaps a new non-webcontainer specific ( not specific to jetty
> >>> or tomcat) file transfer web application that is not tied to the
> >>> console should be created.
> >>>
> >>>
> >

View raw message