On Monday, September 8, 2003, at 11:30 am, Greg Wilkins wrote:
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:On Monday, September 8, 2003, at 02:36 AM, Greg Wilkins wrote:[SNIP]
Are there any spec requirements that must be considered?
But I don't want that to stop discussion while the code is being written.
I think what is best for web is bad for ejb and what is best for ejb is bad
for web - so Jeremy and I are a little entrenched in our view points - and
would appreciated input from others.
Jeremy and I could not agree if there were or not :-)
I think that it is agains the spirit (if not the letter) of the spec to ignore the contents of a standard DD just because of the presence of a vendor DD.
Jeremy thinks that it is not, as he sees the generation of the vendor DD as being part of the deployment step.
But if we do go with Jeremies model, we have agreed that the standard DD must at least be check for consistency with the geronimo DD - so it will not be ignored.
Quick question. While the J2EE specs might be moving away from the 'embedding namespaced-extensions inside the standard XML descriptors' - is there anything in the spec anywhere which says a container cannot support it? i.e. could one of our options be to use our deployment extensions inside the standard deployment descriptors. This would avoid some of Gregs concerns - we can just use web.xml and ejb-jar.xml with our extensions inside it.
There seems to be a few different ways of skinning this particular cat and it seems to depend on your exact usage patterns. For developers wishing to target many different containers for a single deployment unit then making a standard deployment descriptor + extra container specific files seems the best approach. In this model a tool like XDoclet would probably be used and so the fact that duplicate stuff occurs in geronimo-ejb-jar.xml and ejb-jar.xml probably wouldn't be that much of an issue.
Another class of users could be those targeting just Geronimo - where they have no main need to also support other containers - in which case they may prefer to embed the Geronimo extensions directly inside web.xml or ejb-jar.xml etc.
The other option is Jeremy's approach, where the standard deployment descriptors remain completely clean & so guaranteed to work on any container - and the geronimo-*.xml overload them.
I can see all these approaches having value to users; so having a way for folks to configure Geronimo to suit their needs sounds like a good idea.
James ------- http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/
