On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 8:53 AM, Sanjiva Weerawarana <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> Hi Jarek, > > Hmmm .. good question. I've actually been thinking for a while that the > idea of associating a folder to a specific extension was a mistake. To me > that's very "static" thinking and its much more convenient to allow people > to use whatever folder hierarchy they want and just put their services > there, however the service is implemented. > > So my ideal scenario is that we allow /services to contain an arbitrary > directory structure and that in each directory you can have any kind of > deployable artifact (or more directories). I'd like to see the directory > hierarchy become the URL path of the service (at least for HTTP; other > transports can define their own mapping). So if you have: > > /services > /foo > /bar.aar > /baz/ > services.xml > other stuff > /bar > /a.aar > /b.js > > etc. then you'd have all the following services: > /foo/bar > /foo/baz > /bar/a > /bar/b > > [Keith- will this cause an issue in the REST stuff? I don't think so > because basically the hierarchy is fixed and all the path and query > variation will come after the path that was followed to resolve the service. > I think that's similar to how things work in servlet/cgi land- the maximum > possible path is used to find the servlet and the rest is given to the > servlet as extra path info.] > > I think it'll be ok to say that if someone wants to put a .zip file > somewhere and consider that a BPEL service (which is what we (WSO2) do in > the hosting of BPEL/Ode processes as services IIRC). That is, it should be > possible to say that a particular folder (structure) + extension combination > can map to a particular service deployer. However that should not be the > only way- I'd like the config to say something like > > extension a ==> deployer b > directory m ==> deployer n > directory x extension y ==> deployer z > > And you're allowed to have any number of either kind, but the order > matters: most specific wins first and the later ones win over newer ones. So > if you have a directory+extension combination then only that extension is > supported in that directory. If you have a directory x specification then > only that deployer is on for that directory etc.. > > Example: > > directory /services extension aar ==> deployer POJODeployer > directory /scripts extension js ==> deployer JSDeployer > directory /dataservices extension ds ==> deployer DSDeployer > extension py ==> deployer JythonDeployer > > Then that means that /services/*.aar get deployed using the POJODeployer, > /scripts/*.js using the JSDeployer and /dataservices/*.ds using the > DSDeployer. If it finds a .py file anywhere except in /services, /scripts or > /dataservices then the JythonDeployer gets called. > > However, it does not say what happens to /services/*.zip for example as no > instructions are provided. > > We can add: > > directory /services ==> deployer OtherServiceDeployer > > which would mean that any other files I find in the /services directory > will be handed to OtherServiceDeployer for deployment. > > What about sub-directories and supported expanded aar deployment. I suggest > that if a directory contains a services.xml file we consider that a service > directory, otherwise we assume its a directory of services and treat each > file and directory per the deployment rules specified. we can do some thing like that Jboss does. In Jboss if you want to deploy a web application either it should be put as .war file or under a directory of which name ends with .war . i.e in axis2 point of view either it should be bar.aar file or bar.aar directory. In my point of view always deployer should only map to an extension. In the above way it can support both expanded and single file modes. In Axis2.xml level we should be able to define deployment directories.(In most case one is enough). These directories can have files with any extension and relevant deployer can be used to deploy these files. In http case service path is determined relative to this directory. thanks, Amila. > > What do you think? If you think we can pursue this path I can write up a > more precise description .. > > Sanjiva. > > > Jarek Gawor wrote: > >> Hey, >> >> I've been working on this problem and ran into some issues and would >> like to get your comments before committing a fix. The >> RepositoryListener.findServicesInDirectory() scans the "services" >> directory and tries to deploy service modules (.jar or .aar files) >> using ServiceDeployer. But also, when it files files with other >> extensions it tries to deploy them too using a Deployer registered for >> the given extension. For example, if you have the following deployer >> entry in the axis2.xml: >> >> <deployer extension=".svc" directory="widgets" >> class="org.apache.axis2.deployment.deployers.CustomDeployer"/> >> >> The CustomDeployer will be used to deploy files with .svc extension in >> the "widgets" directory AND the "services" directory. That's a bit >> weird, IMHO. >> >> So, what I'm proposing is to remove the entire 'else' statement at >> line 303 on RepositoryListener.findServicesInDirectory() so that only >> service modules (.jar or .aar files) can be deployed from within the >> services directory. This solution might break some existing >> deployments where people put non-service module files under the >> services directory but that can be easily fixed by either moving the >> files to the right directory or by adding another deployer entry in >> axis2.xml for the services directory. For example: >> >> <deployer extension=".svc" directory="widgets" >> class="org.apache.axis2.deployment.deployers.CustomDeployer"/> >> <deployer extension=".svc" directory="services" >> class="org.apache.axis2.deployment.deployers.CustomDeployer"/> >> >> Thoughts? >> >> Jarek >> >> On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 5:20 PM, Jarek Gawor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> Does anyone have comments on >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AXIS2-4101? In general, I would >>> like to know if we should allow for multiple deployers to be >>> registered for the same file extension (for any directory). Right now, >>> only one is assumed and that causes problems. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Jarek >>> >>> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> > > -- > Sanjiva Weerawarana, Ph.D. > Founder & Director; Lanka Software Foundation; http://www.opensource.lk/ > Founder, Chairman & CEO; WSO2, Inc.; http://www.wso2.com/ > Member; Apache Software Foundation; http://www.apache.org/ > Visiting Lecturer; University of Moratuwa; http://www.cse.mrt.ac.lk/ > > Blog: http://sanjiva.weerawarana.org/ > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- Amila Suriarachchi WSO2 Inc. blog: http://amilachinthaka.blogspot.com/
