Raymond Feng wrote:
Sorry for the late reply. The message skipped out of my attention.
My understanding is that a domain is the administrative (governance)
boundary for SCA composite applications. Why does the Shell needs to
switch between multiple domains within the same session. Typically, most
admin consoles connect to one "boundary" at a time. For example:
* OSGi console connects to an instance of the OSGi runtime
* WebSphere admin console talks to a ND manager for a cell
* Telnet/SSH connects to a host
Why cannot we have the Shell session be associated with one SCA domain
at a time, for example:
shell <domainURI>
tuscany> (all the commands are within the domain)
tuscany>
There are testing scenarios where it's necessary to bring up and run
multiple domains at the same time. I think it would be useful to be
able to do this from a single shell rather than needing to bring up
separate shells to control each of the domains.
Simon
Thanks,
Raymond
/________________________________________________________________
Raymond Feng
rf...@apache.org <mailto:rf...@apache.org>
/Apache Tuscany PMC member and committer: tuscany.apache.org
Co-author of Tuscany SCA In Action book: www.tuscanyinaction.com
Personal Web Site: www.enjoyjava.com
/
________________________________________________________________/
On Jul 31, 2010, at 1:18 AM, ant elder wrote:
On Sun, Jul 25, 2010 at 10:25 AM, ant elder <antel...@apache.org
<mailto:antel...@apache.org>> wrote:
On Sun, Jul 25, 2010 at 8:48 AM, ant elder <antel...@apache.org
<mailto:antel...@apache.org>> wrote:
On Sun, Jul 25, 2010 at 4:02 AM, Luciano Resende
<luckbr1...@gmail.com <mailto:luckbr1...@gmail.com>> wrote:
On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 12:25 AM, ant elder <ant.el...@gmail.com
<mailto:ant.el...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Thats all very useful but i think its a slightly different topic - one
thing that was wanted here was a way to create an isolated Node
instance thats _not_ part of any domain, so yes there's lots of
different ways we can have for building a domain but don't have any
API for creating standalone Nodes.
...ant
What's the difference of a Domain with a single node and a standalone
node that's _not_ part of any domain ?
For practical purposes not so much. Each domain would need its own
unique name but if thats ok then it seems like a fine way to do it to
me. I don't yet quite really understand the purpose of the "node name"
label when starting composites as discussed in [1] but if each node is
really in its own domain i wonder if "node name" could be replaced
with "domain name" and then a user can have started composites each in
their own domain or have multiple composites in the same domain if
they choose.
...ant
[1] http://apache.markmail.org/message/vznaimmhc7jfxtj2
So if we did do that the commands could be something like the following:
help
install <domain> [<uri>] <contributionURL> [-norun -metadata <url>
-duris <uri,uri,...>]
installed <domain> [<contributionURI>]
remove <domain> <contributionURI>
addDeploymentComposite <domain> <contributionURI> <contentURL>
printDomainLevelComposite <domain>
start <domain> <curi> <compositeUri>
status <domain> [<curi> <compositeUri>]
stop <domain> [<curi> <compositeUri>]
bye
Any comments/alternatives/updates on that?
...ant
No comments after a week so i'll go start on it, can update as it goes
along if there are updates later.
...ant
