Hi gajanan x.kulkarni:
> Hi
>
> how we will handle situation like
>
> run deploy uri and it will deploy to DAS
>
> now next time I want to target the already deployed app
> to
> perticular cluster or server. ?
>
>
If we want to target the application from the DAS to the instance. It will still use the original syntax about deployment. I think you can still use the command of create-application-ref. I don't think it is related to this new feature.
>
> another one
>
>
>
> I want to just deploy to particular cluster or instance,
> but not on
> DAS, do we allow this in any mode(CLI, DAS, deployURI)
> of deploy
> operation. ?
>
>
yes, we allow this situation both happened in deploy command and deployuri command. It's related to the synchronization about DAS and cluster/instance. It is original syntax to the deployment and I will change anything.
Thanks
Jeremy
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Gajanan
>
>
>
> On 3/8/2013
> 2:47 PM, lvsongping wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Hi, Hong:
>
> Thanks for your
> patient reply. I have just
> change a little in this version(in section 4.5.1
> Public
> Interface).
>
>
> 2. Section 4.1
> Technical Details:
>
>
> a. Section 4.1.1.1 DAS Mode: the target should only
> be the DAS server (the default
> "server") and not cluster.
>
>
> b. Section 4.1.1.2/4.1.1.3 Standalone Instance
> Mode/Cluster Mode: standalone instance should be
> handled
> similarly as cluster. For both targets, based on
> what we
> previously discussed, the deployuri command will
> handle
> things between client and DAS (similar to what
> you described
> in the DAS mode section) to handle the file
> download etc
> during deployment, and for between DAS and
> standalone
> instance/cluster part, the existing _deploy
> command should
> be used and deployuri should not be replicated.
> Like
> DeployCommand which only executes on DAS, the
> DeployURICommand should only be executed on DAS
> also. Once
> the DAS part of the deployment finishes, the
> code path
> should be exactly the same for a URI param and a
> File param.
>
>
> I have converge the section of cluster
> and
> instance into one section: I have list some of
> the syntax
> about deploying the application to the DAS or
> cluster.
> One good point that Tom brought up which I did
> not communicate clearly previously is we should
> not modify
> the command line framework.to accomplish this
> feature. The
> URI should be resolved by the deployuri command
> running in
> the DAS, i.e., the file should not be downloaded
> by the
> client. So this will be the last major area to
> make changes
> in the one pager.
>
>
>
>
> Sorry about my careless for this situation.
> How
> about coding the logical of download operation
> into the
> common-util
>
> modules(org.glassfish.common.util.admin.MapInjectionResolver)
> ? Because I think the MapInjectionResolver is
> one of the
> best position to format the URI to File syntax.
>
>
> If It is still not a proper position, I will
> try to implement it in the deployment module
> without change
> any other modules.
>
>
> 5. Section 4.5 Interfaces
>
> a.
> Section 4.5.1 Public Interfaces: you should
> document the syntax of the new deployuri command
> here with
> the options/operand.
>
> I have list some option about deployuri in
> section 4.5.1 Public Interfaces, I’m not
> so sure whether my
> list of options is enough, What I think is that
> nearly all
> of the options support in deploy command should
> be support
> when it comes to the deployuri
> commad.
>
> Maybe you can say the command will have the
> same options as the deploy command with
> exception of option
> x, y, z etc (list differences).
>
>
>
>
> Ok, I will change the sentence.
>
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
> - Hong
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> From: Hong Zhang [mailto:hong.hz.zhang_at_oracle.com]
>
> Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2013
> 5:03 AM
>
> To: dev_at_glassfish.java.net
>
> Subject: Re: (review dependency) one
> pager about
> GLASSFISH-12699
>
>
>
> Hi, Jeremy
>
> Thanks for updating the one
> pager based on the previous
> comments and adding lots of the details to this
> new version!
> Please see my additional comments below.
>
>
>
> 1. Section 3.1 Problem Area:
> I like all the new contents
> you added here, but I feel most of the contents
> here
> probably belong in other sections: some of them
> probably in
> Technical Details section, and some of them
> probably in Out
> Of Scope section (the http use cases). The
> problem we are
> trying to solve here is similar to what you put
> in the
> Justifications section, is to allow user deploy
> with a URI
> directly instead of doing a two step process,
> obtain the
> file associated with the URI and then deploy.
>
>
>
> 2. Section 4.1
> Technical Details:
>
>
> a. Section 4.1.1.1 DAS Mode: the target should only
> be the DAS server (the default
> "server") and not cluster.
>
>
> b. Section 4.1.1.2/4.1.1.3 Standalone Instance
> Mode/Cluster Mode: standalone instance should be
> handled
> similarly as cluster. For both targets, based on
> what we
> previously discussed, the deployuri command will
> handle
> things between client and DAS (similar to what
> you described
> in the DAS mode section) to handle the file
> download etc
> during deployment, and for between DAS and
> standalone
> instance/cluster part, the existing _deploy
> command should
> be used and deployuri should not be replicated.
> Like
> DeployCommand which only executes on DAS, the
> DeployURICommand should only be executed on DAS
> also. Once
> the DAS part of the deployment finishes, the
> code path
> should be exactly the same for a URI param and a
> File param.
>
>
>
>
> 3. Section 4.1.3 Use Cases:
>
> a.
> Section 4.1.3.1: I am not too sure how the first
> sentence fit in the context (For the command of
> deployuri to
> be applied, there must be an active version of
> the
> application), maybe you could clarify.
>
>
> b. I noticed there are some use cases you listed
> here are the ones that we don't plan to
> support, in that
> case we should probably separate the use cases
> into two
> groups, one is supported use cases and one is
> not supported
> use cases (where appropriate error message will
> be
> provided).
>
>
>
> 4. Section 4.3 In Scope: Can
> you clarify what this meant
> (The command of “deployuri” will
> accept the URI as a path to
> deploy the application which is still not been
> downloaded.
> It will skip the step about downloading the
> application
> during the Internet)?
>
>
>
> 5. Section 4.5 Interfaces
>
> a.
> Section 4.5.1 Public Interfaces: you should
> document the syntax of the new deployuri command
> here with
> the options/operand.
>
>
>
> 6. Section 4.7 Admin/Config
> Support: as we talked
> previously, you should add the plan for console
> here (plan
> to support or not support for initial release).
>
>
>
> 7. Section 4.10 Packaging,
> Delivery & Upgrade: you
> mentioned there will be some changes to the
> RemoteRestAdminCommand, what are the changes you
> are
> thinking about?
>
>
>
> 8. Section 6.1 Project
> Availability: as we discussed
> previously, this is now too late for Java EE 7
> release, you
> can put the date as TBD for now.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> - Hong
>
> On 2/26/2013 3:08 AM,
> lvsongping wrote:
>
>
> Hi, Hong, Tim:
> Cc: GF developers:
>
> I have renew my one pager about
> GLASSFISH-12699 and write down some detailed
> situation
> about deploying the application by accepting
> the path as
> URI.
> Maybe some of my content I have written into
> the one pager will not as good as you think,
> if it is not
> enough, I want you give some
> useful tips to me.
>
> The related JIRA URL are as
> follows:
> http://java.net/jira/browse/GLASSFISH-12699
>
>
>
> Best regards
>
> Jeremy
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> "I say the glass is always full- half with air, half
> with water!" - Modi
>
>
>