Folks,
Comments inline
ant elder wrote:
[snip]
I've been thinking about how to provide useful input here but I'm still
a little puzzled as it mixes different topics in one thread. I've left a
few snippets above to try to illustrate that, and there's more (about
distro packaging for example) in other responses to the thread.
Here are the topics I think I've seen:
- Does the app developer need to know what Tuscany and dependency JARs
are required by his SCA contributions?
- Under which circumstances does the app packager want to package the
Tuscany and dependency JARs with the application artifacts.
- Which containers are we supporting and what kind of integration with
them? Tomcat is just one example, Geronimo, JMS providers, embedded
Jetty are others.
- Does the app developer need to know ahead of time which container
integration his app is going to be deployed to. For example can I use
the EJB, WS and JMS bindings together in one app, and which container
integration is going to support that?
- What distro Zips are we building and what do they contain? just the
runtime? samples or not? dependencies or not? are we building
specialized distros for different use cases?
Would it make sense to spawn separate threads for these different topics?
--
Jean-Sebastien
All these topics seem related to me so so far i think it helps having the
one thread about them. Not every email needs to be about them all, just snip
out text leaving the bit you want to comment on, threaded news readers make
it easy enough to keep track of the discussion. I'd rather have you
participate though so do feel welcome to start other related threads.
I think we need to keep in mind the bigger overall picture when thinking
about these details, if we've been getting too much into the implementation
detail would help to step back a bit - the following are the things i think
we're trying to do here:
1) applications to contain only the code and other artifacts required for
the application itself not Tuscany internals - simple sca contribution jars
+1
2) some sort of runtime(s) which can run those application contribution
jars, so that could be things like standalone (command prompt), from
testcases, in a webapp, or some customization of something like
Tomcat/Geronimo/WebSphere/JBoss etc
+1
I think we also need:
3) Those runtimes need to be distributed but the Tuscany download page
should have a small number of downloads so its easy for users to work out
which to choose
The question is whether this is a "runtime" or "SCA runtime that can be
added to some existing runtime" - ie If I already have Tomcat, surely
all I need is the extra bits to enable SCA apps to run within Tomcat?
4) To make it easy for newbies to run things so at least one distribution
should have prebuilt samples so they can be run out-of-the box without
having to be compiled/built and for things to work without having to do
much/any messing about with installation/configuration/customizing.
+1, although there is a conflict here - you have to decide what
runtime(s) to support and that limits your applications. eg If you want
JEE sample applications, you need a JEE runtime (etc). Perhaps the
simple cases would be a) pure standalone b) Tomcat -- where b) is
used for samples that use JSPs or Servlets to provide a pretty face.
5) Ideally the easy to use distribution is not so large.
Yes - which calls EITHER for separation of runtime(s) and samples, or
for a severely limited package with a limited set of samples.
Do all those sound reasonable? Does anyone want to add/remove/modify
anything?
...ant
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
