Great. Lets get a maven project stub generated and get started. Any
ideas for planning?
~Jonathan
Weston M. Price wrote:
Right on dude....
You nailed it....especially in terms of the relationship between the
controller and the two...well at this point we will call them services....The
"manager" cooridinates the interaction between the two...I am of the personal
mind that the verification service should have no knowledge (at least in
terms of hard references, we will share code) of the deployment service. This
would allow the modules to be distinct....this would naturally dictate a
common set of classes shared between us which could possibly be it's own
module, perhaps the objects implementing the javax interfaces.
Weston
On Monday 11 August 2003 04:48 pm, Jonathan Duty wrote:
Since I'm weird and think better in pictures, I tried to draw what you
were describing. Do I have the correct Idea of your vision?
The image is attached. Hope this helps others out also.
~Jonathan
Weston M. Price wrote:
I have thought of it in terms of a deployment manager (as Chris alluded to
earlier this morning). The manager would be responsible for coordinating
the interaction between the verification engine and the deployment
engine....sort of a controller, that way the two can be loosely coupled
relying on an external agent to provide an higher level of service, in
this case the complete deployment of a J2EE archive.
Weston
On Monday 11 August 2003 04:05 pm, Labeeb Syed wrote:
In this scenario, the verifier will have to interface
with the deployer. I would definitely like to
implement the SPI for the deployer.
Q: Should the deployer be responsible for ensuring
bean consistency, e.g., entity bean cmr mapping vs
databases and relational mappings, or any such other
technical issues (realms checking, etc.)?
Chris, if this is what we'd work on, I'd like to come
up with a list potential technical problems we could
encounter to ensure just integrity of the DD file.
Labeeb Syed
--- Chris Opacki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
That is exactly what i was thinking. This is the
object model that has been defined in the deployment
spec... under Tool Provider Interfaces. There are
also
some other classes, exceptions and interfaces that
both modules might use.
--- "Weston M. Price" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
But I do agree that the two teams must work
closely
together....Chris made an
excellent point in indetifying that there are
certain basic facilities that
we can use together....I think if we can agree on
a
common object model for
archive formats (EAR, WAR, SAR) then we could
probably develop our own
streams, attributes, behavior.....
Weston
On Monday 11 August 2003 03:18 pm, Chris Opacki
wrote:
Ditto on all of that! Quite honestly...the
deployer
shouldn't run...period...until the verifier has
run...its a good idea that the deployableobject
are
build from within a controller that sends them
to
the
verifier for verification and then to the
deployer.
Something along that lines at a high level. we
can
reuse both engines for CLI and the GUI.
--- Jonathan Duty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
+1 You've convinced me. That would be a bad
a$$
tool to have as a
developer.
Plus, the deployment team could use it if they
want
to verify the
archive schema before they start deploying it.
Count me in!
~Jonathan
Jonathan Duty
Software Developer - eWashtenaw
-----Original Message-----
From: Weston M. Price
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 6:41 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: J2EE deployment verifier
I agree completely. I think what we are
talking
about are two modules
that are
close cousins. The verification manager is
again,
the "front-line" of
defense
for the deployment manager. I would assume the
deployment manager would
deal
with critical errors such as
LinkageConstraints,
incorrect classfile
versions
etc. while the verfication manager will handle
actual semantic
fallibities in
the deployment descriptors based upon the
existing
specifications.
The reason I mentioned a seperate
verification
module was that I
would
developers (hell, I know I would) like an
engine
that given a deployment
platform could validate their archive before
ever
trying to drop it in
the
chute. This would save a lot of time largely
due
to
the fact that XML
descriptors are not typed and you don't know
if
they
are "correct" at
compile
time. I suppose the biggest win in all of this
in my
opion would be to
provide hooks for an ANT task that would
verify
the
archive during
compile
time.
Regards,
Weston
On Monday 11 August 2003 02:39 pm, Jonathan
Duty
wrote:
Why couldn't they be close friends. Could
this
verifier, even as a
separate module, be a subset of the deploy
module?
I mean we don't
want
to deploy something that the J2EE server
will
not
accept.
Maybe these 2 groups should work close
together.
~Jonathan
-----Original Message-----
From: Chris Opacki
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 10:23 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: J2EE deployment verifier
My bad...I was assuming the deploy tool and
the
verifier would be close friends.
;)
--- Srihari S <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
True
Our module is just going to check and
declare
whether or not a given unit of
deployment
is deployable on a j2ee server or not.
Nothing more..nothing less.
Building this unit will be our
mission..right
weston??
-----Original Message-----
From: Weston M. Price
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 3:05 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: J2EE deployment verifier
And even further, let's clarify the
verification
is
a completely different
animal than actual deployment. Am I
correct
on
this
one at least in terms of
the way we are thinking about this module?
Weston
=== message truncated ===
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
