[X] Add these features to the existing bin/deployer.jar tool -- dims
On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 15:58:11 -0700, Dain Sundstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I want one tool, with a command line option to build online. I think > it would be *extremely* confusing to have two tools to "deploy". > > -dain > > On Oct 25, 2004, at 7:44 PM, Aaron Mulder wrote: > > > I only got one vote on this, and it wasn't from a committer. > > Please everyone take a look and send along your vote. > > > > Thanks, > > Aaron > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > > Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 14:46:41 -0400 (EDT) > > From: Aaron Mulder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Vote: 1 deployment tool or 2? > > > > It looks like we'd like to have a command-line deployment tool > > with JSR-88 features. This would be aimed at providing hot deploy and > > start/stop and other JSR-88 features, as well as operating on remote > > servers. It could use the same logic as the Maven plugin or otherwise, > > I'm not concerned about the implementation yet. The question is: > > > > [ ] Add these features to the existing bin/deployer.jar tool > > [ ] Create a new bin/xyz.jar tool with only these features, so we > > have an "offline" deployer and a "JSR-88" or "J2EE" deployer. > > > > The advantage to the unified tool is that you'd have one deployer > > tool for any scenario. One command to remember, etc. > > > > There are a couple advantages to having separate tools: > > > > * If combined into one tool, the help would need to be rewritten to > > make > > the 2 usage modes clear. For example, JSR-88 can't handle creating > > a > > CAR or executable/classPath information, while the current deployer > > can't handle start/stop/undeploy/etc. Also there would need to be > > substantial syntax checking to avoid mixing parameters from > > different > > modes. It seems unfortunate that a lot of the command line > > arguments > > would clash with each other. > > > > * The code for a unified tool would need to decide how to operate > > based > > on the mode, and some operations (install/distribute) would need two > > code paths for the same operation, making it harder to have clean > > code. > > > > * The JSR-88 features of a combined tool might work against other > > servers > > (given an appropriate plugin), but the other features would not, > > which > > would also need to be clarified. > > > > * The current deploy tool would not depend on JSR-88, making it > > possible > > to have a more compact Geronimo distribution with a functional > > deployer, granted without remote deploy or other JSR-88 features. > > > > Anyway, please vote. > > > > Thanks, > > Aaron > > -- Davanum Srinivas - http://webservices.apache.org/~dims/
