On Mar 28, 2009, at 8:01 PM, Bill Shannon wrote:
> Jerome Dochez wrote:
>> On Mar 27, 2009, at 9:28 PM, Bill Shannon wrote:
>>> Kenneth Saks wrote:
>>>>> This is what would happen when people do not specify the --type
>>>>> parameters. From Hong's example, it's clear that the only
>>>>> interest of specifying the --type parameter would be to say that
>>>>> you want to deploy the web-app part but not the EJB (used as
>>>>> pojo) for instance
>>>>>
>>>>> so you can do
>>>>>
>>>>> deploy --type ejb,web -> would deploy in both container.
>>>>> deploy --type web -> only web container
>>>>> deploy --type ejb -> only ejb container
>>>> Would the deployment framework still be processing the web.xml /
>>>> sun-web.xml in this last case? The EJB
>>>> code could contain dependencies on it. For example : component
>>>> environment entries, EE 6 <module-name> , etc.
>>>> I'm not sure I understand the real value of this. If someone
>>>> really wants ejb components completely
>>>> separated from web components they can just package them in a
>>>> separate ejb-jar.
>>>
>>> I agree.
>>>
>>> I understand specifying a type when the server can't unambiguously
>>> figure out the type on its own, but using it to "turn off" part of
>>> the functionality seems wrong.
>>>
>>> If I deploy something of type "web", I want it to do everything the
>>> web container is supposed to do, which currently includes supporting
>>> EJBs.
>> so what solution do you propose for people who do not own the
>> packaging of what they are deploying, reusing off the shelves
>> components which packaging may not reflect their exact usage ?
>
> Sorry, I don't understand the use case.
>
> Are you worried about someone who is given a war file that contains
> EJBs, but they want to deploy it without allowing the EJBs to work?
> Doesn't seem important to me. If they really wanted to do that,
> why couldn't the repackage the war file to remove the components they
> don't want to work, or why couldn't they deploy it using an alternate
> deployment descriptor that turns off the EJB components?
they have to repackage, that was the point I was making
but more importantly, if you agree that there can be some ambiguity
not resolvable by the server, if you change type to have an additive
behaviour, how would this resolve the ambiguity ? It seems to me that
you are thinking packaging (war, jar, ear, osgi) while the --type was
targeted to containers (web, ejb, jpa...).
Take the following example :
I have an OSGi war file that has both servlet.xml (for deployment in a
Java EE appserver) and a bundle activator to use the OSGi HttpService
to deploy its servlets (when running in OSGi env.). If we somehow
don't segregate the containers, we can happen to deploy this web
application twice...
I know this might be a stretch but the open composition of components
of all kind, I think it might be useful. At the very least we need a
bundle type segregator (war vs osgi) which would resolve the case
above (the user would choose the deployment method by specifying the
type).
I can live with that for now and see if that's enough.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>