[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2244?page=all ]
Aaron Mulder updated GERONIMO-2244:
-----------------------------------
Priority: Major (was: Critical)
I remember having a larger discussion around the geronimo-module:naming versus
geronimo-naming:naming elements, whether we needed a "type" (j2eeType) as well
as a "type" (module's Artifact type), and so on. I don't remember where we
left that. Eventually, I think we should support explicit references
identifying the component's module by its full group/artifact/version/type (I
could see perhaps foo/bar/1/war depending on foo/bar/1/jar so there'd be some
reason to distinguish).
> Explicit reference fail when module type is not "car"
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: GERONIMO-2244
> URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2244
> Project: Geronimo
> Issue Type: Bug
> Security Level: public(Regular issues)
> Components: deployment, console
> Affects Versions: 1.1
> Reporter: Aaron Mulder
> Fix For: 1.1.x
>
>
> Currently the <pattern> used in the naming schema includes group, artifact,
> and version, but not type. In ENCConfigBuilder.buildAbstractNameQuery, the
> type is hardcoded to "car". This means that if you use a naming:pattern with
> an artifactId, it only works if the target module's type is actually "car".
> This is not true, for example, for several module types created by the admin
> console, as well as in general for user-defined modules.
> The naming:pattern element should include a "type" element, and
> ENCConfigBuilder (and any other necessary code) should respect it.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators:
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
