But don't you think some sort of ordering (like what was there before Jason removed it) should be implicit?
Datasources specified in .xml files should be deployed before any EAR/WAR/JAR files, don't you think? That seems like a common/simple scenario and I don't think a user with that basic of a dependency should be required to specially number their deployment files... Though I don't think requiring it for more complex deployment order is a big deal... > From: "Bill Burke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 13:37:25 -0500 > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] deploy: the votes are in > > This also greatly simplifies the code right? Just sort the directory and > you have your ordering. > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Chris >> Harris >> Sent: Friday, March 15, 2002 1:31 PM >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] deploy: the votes are in >> >> >> I don't think there was any intention of forcing people to >> rename their files. The point is that if you need an >> explicit ordering this is the easiest way for the user to >> do it. If you don't need ordering then call it anything you >> want. So deployment order is something like >> >> all xxxMyName.[j|s|w|e|r]ar/xml files >> all anyothernameinanyorder.[j|s|w|e|r]ar/xml files >> >> (apologies for syntax!) >> >> So this way you can specify stuff which absolutely has to >> go first and, if you don't care when it gets deployed, then >> name it whatever you like and it gets deployed after the >> ones that need to be first. >> >> (disclaimer: I was at the London training and I did vote >> for the numbering solution) >> >> c >> >> --- David Jencks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> I'm with Jason on this one. I think asking people to >>> change their file >>> names to ensure deploy order is ludicrous. As I recall, >>> the unix sysv >>> numbering is all on symlinks, not the scripts/whatever >>> themselves. >>> >>> david jencks >>> >>> On 2002.03.14 18:18:46 -0500 Jason Dillon wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> deploy1/2/3 zero votes >>>>> 000-999mywathever.xar:11 votes >>>>> deploy.order: 9 votes >>>>> >>>>> some just don't give a hoot >>>>> >>>>> ok the deploy.order was a good idea given by a >>> sweedish guy sitting at >>>> the >>>>> back of the class, it goes like this, put a >>> deploy.order that specifies >>>> the >>>>> order in which you deploy the files, it means that you >>> put for example >>>>> <deploy-order> >>>>> the-first-file.xar >>>>> the-second-file.xar >>>>> </deploy-order> >>>>> >>>> >>>> This is the same as explicitly listing your deployment >>> urls... which if >>>> you don't specify a file:// directory url the order is >>> as you list it. >>>> It is only when listing from a directory which causes >>> this >>>> dependency/order problem. >>>> >>>>> I kind of liked it, since it means you can put >>> additional information, >>>> but >>>>> sacha pointed out you can also put a order.readme file >>> and be done with >>>>> this, with the drawbacks that you could actually mess >>> up the names >>>> easily >>>>> (bound to happen) and that you needed multiple >>> deploy.order files to get >>>> at >>>>> the same result if you went for dynamic deployments. >>>>> >>>>> so the 000-999.xar idea is the one, if someone wants >>> to do it go >>>> ahead.... >>>>> >>>> >>>> I still think this is a really bad idea. >>>> >>>> We have a half functional dependency system... so >>> rather than fix is, we >>>> artificially force users to number there deployments, >>> or staticly list >>>> the urls to deploy. >>>> >>>> How does that make the JBoss deployment system easy? >>> One of the big >>>> features of JBoss is easy deployment... which this just >>> basically tosses >>>> out the window. The instructions for deployment go >>> from : >>>> >>>> "copy to deploy/" >>>> >>>> to >>>> >>>> "copy to deploy/, make sure that the file name is >>> prefixed with a number >>>> such that it is larger than all dependency deployments >>> and lower than >>>> other deployments which depend on it. If you are not >>> sure what the >>>> dependencys are then trial and error... or go look >>> through each >>>> deplopment descriptor and...". >>>> >>>> Why not just put the simple sorting bits back in UDS >>> until the >>>> dependency issue can be resolved? >>>> >>>> --jason >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Jboss-development mailing list >>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>> >>> >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development >>>> >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Jboss-development mailing list >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development >> >> __________________________________________________ >> Do You Yahoo!? >> Everything you'll ever need on one web page >> from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts >> http://uk.my.yahoo.com >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Jboss-development mailing list >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development > > > _______________________________________________ > Jboss-development mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development _______________________________________________ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
