> YADD (Yet Another Deployer Design)... comments below.
>
> > I see two major problems with the current usage: 1) MainDeployer is a
> > bootstrapped class, with no way to provide an alternate implementation,
2)
> > All SubDeployers rely on a concrete implementation of deployer:
MainDeployer,
>
> Why do you need another impl of MainDeployer.  This component serves to
> aggregate SubDeployers and to provide a common interface for clients into
the
> deployment system.
>
> It might be doing a little much at the moment (I haven't looked at what
the
> code looks like this week), but from a concept pov there is no reason to
make
> this pluggable.

I don't know... perhaps someone would like to add a custom layer of security
on all deployments.  Perhaps they would like to get an email when new
deployments occur.  Who knows?  The point is I can see no down-side to
making this pluggable, and it is a very easy patch. More important, though,
is to prevent SubDeployers from accessing MainDeployer specific
functionality.  That is just bad design.

> Note, that this change will invalidate the Deployer usage which is needed
for
> DeploymentScanner (including NetBoot caching components).  That doesn't
mean
> those components can not change to adapt to new designs, but it seems like
> your design is not taking this into account.

I'm not sure what you mean here.  By Deployer usage do you mean lastDeployed
and lastModified?  I had planned on leaving these in the DeploymentInfo
object.  What are NetBoot caching components?
>
> > Let me know if you have any comments.  I would like to get started on
this
> > soon.
>
> I think we need to think hard about the requirements of the deployment
> system... look at the current use cases and those we invision for the
future
> before we start redesigning this critical subsystem again.
>
> This is definetly not going to happen for 3.0, perhaps 3.1-3.2.
>
> We really need to get this crap down right... we seem to change this every
few
> weeks, which just causes trouble for those who rely on how it works, those
who
> write documentation for it & those who provide components around it.
>
> Let us take some time to get this done right... then leave it alone.

I agree.  Thanks for your feedback.

-Larry



_______________________________________________
Jboss-development mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development

Reply via email to