Sorry for the late response, but this doesn't exist right now, but could be implemented to add jboss dependency managmenet to j2ee deployables. Probably just <depends>:SomeObjectName</depends>...
--jason Bill Burke wrote: >Can you put a dependency tag in jboss.xml? What's the syntax? > >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Jason Dillon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >>Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2002 5:53 PM >>To: Bill Burke >>Cc: marc fleury; Scott M Stark; Jboss-Development @ Lists . Sourceforge >>. Net >>Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] ordering proposal >> >> >>A directory based short-term solution (which does not hint at any >>sysv-like functionality) is probably the easiest to implement and mange. >> >>It will however complicate the management of the system dramatically... >>actually any of the solutions/hacks which have been mentiond will only >>complicate. >> >>Take the N* prefix method, now the scanners need to make sure they sort >>by prefix, such that 05 comes becore 06 and so on. When two deployables >>share the same prefix and one depends on the other, then you must >>reorder. Depending on how complicated your deployment is, this could be >>a pain. >> >>For directories, if you start out with a small number, system, >>user-support, user (or whatever), then if a dependency between a >>component in user-support and user exists, where user-support c depends >>on user c, then you have to artificually create a third directory to >>resolve the conflict. >> >>So, as a user... where do I put my deployable? Does it matter that my >>deployable is of type x? >> >>Some users might like N*, some might like directories... the system >>should be able to handle both... lets not force one or the other. >> >>For the previous example, where beans loaded before the datasource, >>couldn't that be handled by putting a dependency tag in jboss.xml? Or >>is there more to the dependency problem than that? >> >>--jason >> >> >>Bill Burke wrote: >> >>>directory solution is better and easier to maintain IMHO than >>> >>the SXX stuff. >> >>>My gut feeling tells me that with the SXX solution you'll constantly be >>>changing filenames and will create headaches for everyone. Directoy >>>ordering and <depends> should be good enough for the implicit >>> >>and explicit >> >>>ordering you need, no? >>> >>>Bill >>> >>>>-----Original Message----- >>>>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of marc >>>>fleury >>>>Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2002 11:00 AM >>>>To: Scott M Stark; Jboss-Development @ Lists . Sourceforge . Net >>>>Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] ordering proposal >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>|-----Original Message----- >>>>|From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>>|[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On >>>> >>Behalf Of Scott >> >>>>|M Stark >>>>|Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2002 8:00 AM >>>>|To: Jboss-Development @ Lists . Sourceforge . Net >>>>|Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] ordering proposal >>>>| >>>>| >>>>|Or equivalently, mirror the deploy1, deploy2, ... etc structure in >>>>|the ear. >>>>| >>>>|Case 1: >>>>|ear/ >>>>|------deploy1/sar >>>>|------deploy1/war >>>>| >>>>|Case 2: >>>>|ear/ >>>>|------deploy1/war >>>>|------deploy2/sar >>>> >>>>yes, and i actually now prefer the explicit SXX solution for >>>> >>naming, doing >> >>>>away with rc.d structures. We just order by number SIMPLE, >>>> >>ultra SIMPLE >> >>>>in the abscence of numbering we deploy after the numbers. >>>> >>>>marcf >>>> >>>>| >>>>|Then you have the same ordering logic for the fixed directories and >>>>|application deployment units. >>>>| >>>>|xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>>>|Scott Stark >>>>|Chief Technology Officer >>>>|JBoss Group, LLC >>>>|xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>>>|----- Original Message ----- >>>>|From: "Scott M Stark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>|To: "Jboss-Development @ Lists . Sourceforge . Net" >>>>|<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>|Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2002 7:47 AM >>>>|Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] ordering proposal >>>>| >>>>| >>>>|> >>>>|> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>|> From: "marc fleury" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>|> To: "marc fleury" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "David Jencks" >>>>|> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>|> Cc: "Jboss-Development @ Lists . Sourceforge . Net" >>>>|> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>|> Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2002 5:42 AM >>>>|> Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] ordering proposal >>>>|> >>>>|> >>>>|> > ok, >>>>|> > >>>>|> > so i will implement the following >>>>|> > >>>>|> > deploy directory remains there, you can drop anything in deploy. >>>>|> > >>>>|> > 3 rules: >>>>|> >> > jar/ >>>>|> > ---sar >>>>|> > ---war/ >>>>|> > ------jar2 >>>>|> > 1- There is an ordering in deploy xml>sar>war>ear>jar or >>>>whatever i had >>>>|in >>>>|> > there before. >>>>|> > >>>>|> > 2-if you deploy a bean with dependencies, whatever they >>>> >>may be, i.e. >> >>>>|> > sar/ear/war/rar/jar containment is enough to order. The >>>>inner stuff is >>>>|> > deployed first >>>>|> > so >>>>| >>>>|> > >>>>|> > will result in the following order >>>>|> > jar2>sar>war>jar >>>>|> > >>>>|> > this is great, this is today in cvs, unless a certain >>>> >>someone removed >> >>>>|this >>>>|> > as well. >>>>|> > >>>>|> > The problem is a painful russian doll structure. >>>>|> This is using Ant as the deployment language. If the sar >>>> >>depends on the >> >>>>|> war because it is adapting a legacy protocol to soap for example, you >>>>|> would then need to repackage the above to: >>>>|> >>>>|> jar/ >>>>|> ---war/ >>>>|> ------sar >>>>|> ------jar2 >>>>|> >>>>|> I would rather see an ear as the standalone deployment package and >>>>|> include a jboss-application.xml descriptor that allows for the >>>>|specification >>>>|> of deployment ordering in there. >>>>|> >>>>|> >>>>|> >>>>|> _______________________________________________ >>>>|> 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 >>>> >>> >>>_______________________________________________ >>>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
