Hi,
I am going to vote -0.5.... not -1... on these, since my concerns are
not so much technical as they are timing based....
Both of these changes are pretty 'late in the game' for v3.
Since both have worked this way for a significant amount of time, I
would expect to see feedback from unhappy users about one or both of
these issues.
What are the issues that these changes would resolve?
If there isn't significant feedback from users that these are critical
to the success of Java EE 6 and GlassFish v3, then I would say we should
defer on these.
vbk
a couple other comment are in line below.
Bill Shannon wrote:
> A few of us have been discussing some issues with deployment recently and
> I'd like to let everyone know what we ended up with and get your
> feedback.
>
> We have three ways to deploy an application using the command line and
> two cases to consider for each operation.
>
> Here's what we came up with:
>
> | foo does not exist | foo exists
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> deploy foo.war | + | X
> deploy --force foo.war | + | + [2]
> redeploy foo.war | + [1] | +
>
>
> Possible outcomes:
>
> X - command fails
> + - command succeeds, app "foo" is deployed
>
> There were two changes we considered:
>
> 1. Should redeploying an app that isn't deployed be an error? Is it
> likely
> that you made a mistake if you try to redeploy something that isn't
> deployed to begin with? If you don't care whether or not it's already
> deployed why not use deploy --force?
I am lazy. 9 characters vs. 15 characters is compelling... Even folks
that type fast hate to type.
>
> 2. Should deploy --force with an app that's already deployed cause the
> app to be deployed under a different name? The Java EE spec allows
> (but does not require) the deployment tool to choose a different name
> for the app if the name conflicts with an already deployed
> application.
> Does --force really mean "replace this app if it's already there", or
> does it mean "deploy this new app no matter what, without disturbing
> other apps that might be deployed"?
I have a feeling this would have a negative impact on the existing test
suites for GlassFish...
Even if the idea were universally applauded, making that change 'right
now' might have a negative impact on the schedule.
Do we want to do that?
>
> Either of these changes would cause redeploy and deploy --force to behave
> differently. We were worried about the compatibility impact of such a
> change,
> both with v2 (for which deploy is already incompatible because --force is
> the default in v2), and with v3 where people have come to expect these
> two
> commands to behave the same.
>
> If anyone feels strongly that we should make either of these changes,
> let me know.
>
> Thanks.