Hi, Vince
> I disagree with your analysis.
>
> I think that whether by luck or deep analysis, Jerome made the right
> decisions concerning the need for a redeploy "command".
>
> Eliminating it for 'ease of maintenance' is not a compelling
> justification.... especially when there was a working implementation
> that was in-place....
When we made the decision, we were not aware of that the NetBeans plug
in was using the new redeploy command. And I guess we did not realize
the parameter differences of the new redeploy command vs the old "deploy
--force". In any case, we will restore the old syntax of redeploy
command and the changes should be checked in soon.
- Hong
>
> Hong Zhang wrote:
>
>> Hi, Vince
>> For the v3 technology preview release last year, Jerome has come
>> up with a set of commands which can be used for the most common use
>> cases, such as deploy, undeploy. Some of the commands are similar to
>> v2 commands and some of the commands are new. Now we are working on
>> the official release for v3, one task we have is to maintain backward
>> compatibility with v2, and this includes providing the same set of
>> the admin cli commands as in v2. And we need to make choices with the
>> cli commands that were previously available in v3 preview, but are
>> different than the existing v2 cli commands.
>> In general, we don't want to keep two set of commands which do
>> similar things as it could be confusing to user and also require us
>> to do more maintenance. So the default is if there are two similar
>> commands, we keep the v2 command syntax. And in some cases, like the
>> asadmin redeploy command, as there might still be some value in
>> providing the new command, we "alias" it to a similar v2 command
>> ("asadmin deploy --force=true") so we only need to maintain one code
>> path.
>> One thing we need to do but haven't done so (as the command
>> implementation is still on going) is to provide a mapping of the v3
>> preview commands and the equivalent commands that are currently
>> supported in v3. Then we can look at the mapping, and decide what we
>> like and what we don't like. And for example, if it's by popular
>> demand to have the redeploy command with the "name" option, and not
>> the "path", we will try to accommodate that.
>> Jane: as the implementation of deployment related commands was just
>> completed, can you provide such mapping so people know what to expect
>> in v3 technology preview 2 release? And we would still have time to
>> accommodate any necessary changes before the code freeze.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> - Hong
>>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>