if you could rewrite J2EE Deployer at the same time that would be pretty
good :)
marc
|-----Original Message-----
|From: Rickard �berg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
|Sent: Friday, December 08, 2000 3:42 AM
|To: jBoss Developer
|Subject: Re: [jBoss-Dev] Proposed refactoring of ContainerFactory-Ch
|ainingDeployment services in general
|
|
|"Jung , Dr. Christoph" wrote:
|> >Are you saying that you are having multiple EAR applications, and where
|> >an EAR can optionally specify it's parent EAR?
|>
|> well, yes. I should have used more J2EE vocabulary in order to make
|> it clear. Whenever referring to "ejb-jar", I really meant "EAR
|application"
|> - maybe confused
|> that because we are currently not using JSP,
|> but a thick and comfortable VB-GUI.
|
|Alrighty.
|
|> >But multiple EAR's would do the trick, right?
|> >But what if sales and stock both references masterdata *jar*'s through
|> >classpath manifest? I.e. they are seemingly redundant but in reality use
|> >the same jar. Would that be ok?
|>
|> My argument wrt minimising redundancies would be addressed by this
|> technique.
|> The only really relevant argument remains ... performance and
|optimisation
|> argument, yes.
|
|Good, then we agree on consequences.
|
|> >If I understand you correctly, all you're saying is that you want an EAR
|> >to be able to specify a "parent", and then that parents classloader
|> >should be used as parent to the EAR's own classloader. Right?
|>
|> You made a long talk very very short (I bet I�ll get a nick like
|> CG"verbose"J on this list). You were an analyst in your previous life,
|> were�nt you ?
|
|Something like that, yes ;-)
|
|> >Nevertheless, yes this is interesting :-)
|>
|> puuh, interesting enough to extend the J2EEDeployer (undermine, undermine
|> ...) ?
|
|Yes, absolutely. It would an easy fix too (and easy fixes are nice,
|regardless of their use 8-) ).
|
|Basically, we would need an jboss-application.xml file in addition to
|the application.xml one, in which one should be able to specify parent
|application. On deployment the parent of classloader of the application
|would be the CL of the parent application. Also, any beans in child
|application should be able to use parent application EJB names in
|ejb-link references. Hey, this is getting really really interesting! So,
|the only new rule is that EJB-names in child EAR's may not conflict with
|EJB-names of beans in the respective parent application.
|
|Sounds ok?
|
|It is easy to do this, but not trivial. If you're interested in coding
|this I'd be willing to give you a few pointers on how to make it as
|clean as possible.
|
|regards,
| Rickard
|
|--
|Rickard �berg
|
|Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|
|
