"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" wrote : anonymous wrote : Really, how so? Package format
would remain the same as it currently is, except bootstrap and config of
bootstrap is the same as embedded jboss, jboss.
|
| If this Seam deployer could apply special deployment semantics to a
standard Java EE 5 EA
anonymous wrote : Really, how so? Package format would remain the same as it
currently is, except bootstrap and config of bootstrap is the same as embedded
jboss, jboss.
If this Seam deployer could apply special deployment semantics to a standard
Java EE 5 EAR, then great! In JBoss 4 this is no
anonymous wrote : I know that 1) can be done easily enough. Trouble is that it
makes Seam more difficult to learn and to support.
Really, how so? Package format would remain the same as it currently is,
except bootstrap and config of bootstrap is the same as embedded jboss, jboss.
Again, the
I know that 1) can be done easily enough. Trouble is that it makes Seam more
difficult to learn and to support.
Regarding management, it is not useful for application components, I don't
think.
Regarding hotdeploy, I may be wrong I don't see how that can ever work for the
*individual Seam comp
1) I'm really not sure if there is enough value of this, it just makes things
more complex by providing *yet another* deployment option to support and test,
and one that is much less portable than the others. Deployment is already way
too complex for users, and this does not make it simpler, AFA
I think at least 1) could be done intially. To do the rest has MC/Kernel
dependencies.
BTW, there are other advantages to getting this stuff under the MC/Kernel
umbrella in that we'll be able to snap on the management and hotdeployment
optimizations that Scott/Adrian are adding in JBoss 5.
Vi
