Tim Quinn wrote:
> Sorry, I did not notice the original posting, Vince.
>
> Marina Vatkina wrote:
>> I don't think we explode jars in the lib directory (either in an ear
>> or a war).
> Marina is correct; currently neither v2 nor v3 prelude expands library
> JARs, nor does it expect them to be pre-expanded for directory
> deployment.
OK.
>
> The guiding principle - at least up to now - is to expand submodules
> nested within EARs (such as WARs, EJBs, etc.) but to leave other JARs
> alone.
Right.... and that is what generated the question.... It looks like Java
EE 6 blurs the "line" between a WAR and an EAR. I am just trying to see
how that blurring translates from spec into a development environment.
>
> I am not sure if much thinking has gone into whether it makes sense to
> treat EJB JARs inside a WAR as a "submodule" in the same sense, at
> least as far as directory deployment is concerned. One possible
> wrinkle is that, historically, the submodule JAR has been expanded
> into a directory which resides in the same place as the original JAR
> file. If v3 followed that approach then, for the EJB-in-WAR case, the
> directory structure would change from this:
>
> WEB-INF/lib/myejbs.jar
>
> to this
>
> WEB-INF/lib/myejbs_jar/x/y/z.class (or something like that)
>
> and so now we have broken the rule that items in WEB-INF/lib are JARs.
>
> There might be other changes in how archives are handled in v3 that
> might open the door to doing something with this. I like the idea of
> avoiding JARring up the EJBs in the development environment if it's
> avoidable but I think this needs more careful thought than I've been
> able to give to it here.
I was pretty sure this wasn't a "worked" detail at this this point...
but I was willing to be wrong.
>
> How about opening an enhancement request?
Me: (Slaps forhead) I coulda hada V8!
https://glassfish.dev.java.net/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6620
vbk