I'd vote for 2a, because 2b will fail if somebody wants to check the man page of
start-domain before attempting to start it the 1st time.
And it *is* really confusing that even the usage is not available without server
running...
My $.02.
-marina
Bill Shannon wrote:
> Please read this bug report:
>
> https://glassfish.dev.java.net/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5701
>
> Remember that the v3 admin command architecture is extensible.
> It's possible to add new admin commands without modifying the server
> or the asadmin client.
>
> The question then is, how should we handle access to man pages,
> both for commands we ship with v3 and for commands that are added
> to the server later?
>
> I can see a few decision points and corresponding options:
>
> Should the server be required to be up to access man pages for
> remote commands?
>
> 1. If yes, should the user be required to provide correct
> authentication
> information to access remote commands?
>
> a. If yes, that's how it works today.
>
> b. If no, it seems that we have a few options:
>
> i. Provide access to man pages, either through remote commands
> or as raw html, on another port that is configured for no
> authentication.
>
> ii. Provide access to man pages, either through remote commands
> or as raw html, on another URL that is configured for no
> authentication.
>
> iii. Use some sort of role-based access control to limit what
> an unauthenticated user can do using the existing asadmin
> remote commands.
>
> 2. If no, do all man pages need to be available when the server is
> down, or only some subset of the man pages (e.g., for the commands
> that have previously been executed)?
>
> a. If all, we would need to package all the man pages with the client,
> probably with a fallback to access the server if the man page can't
> be found locally. There would also need to be a way for a third
> party to provide local copies of man pages for remote commands;
> providing them as resources in CLASSPATH should be sufficient.
>
> b. If some, we could download the man page for a command on first
> use of the command and cache it locally so that it's available
> when the server is offline. The trickiest issue is detecting
> when the cached man page is invalid.
>
>
> Does anyone else see any other options or approaches?
>
> The status quo is "1a". The bug report argues for "1b" or "2".
>
> What choice do people prefer?