Bill
Bill Burke wrote:
LETS TAKE THESE DISCUSSIONS TO JBOSS-DEV PLEASE!!!!!
Yes, IMO, migration should be a separate distinct tool/step. We should not be maintaining past versions of deployment descriptors in 4.0, 3.2, or 3.0. Anybody know what other vendors do?
Bill
Scott M Stark wrote:
That is a possibility that Bill suggested before, but it excludes the possibility of supporting hot deploy with migration, something we can do. They will be exposed to xsl if there is a problem with the migration. Maybe migration should be a separate step.
Juha Lindfors wrote:
Migration yes. But for that XSL would work just as well, you just run the
script to convert between the descriptors, right? The admin is never
actually exposed to reading or modifying the XSLT... ?
-- Juha
_______________________________________________ the.core mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/the.core
-- ================ Bill Burke Chief Architect JBoss Group LLC. ================
------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net Giveback Program. Does SourceForge.net help you be more productive? Does it help you create better code? SHARE THE LOVE, and help us help YOU! Click Here: http://sourceforge.net/donate/ _______________________________________________ JBoss-Development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
