We should go with the #2 as Harshana mentioned.

We want to deploy car without exploding to deployment directories,
otherwise a) delete is hard b) when dep sync get confused.

--Srinath


On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 1:51 PM, Anjana Fernando <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 1:34 PM, Harshana Martin <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Hi Sinthuja,
>>
>>
>> On Friday, August 2, 2013, Sinthuja Ragendran wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Ayashkantha,
>>>
>>> You should use the first approach IMO. We don't need duplicate the code
>>> for deploying the toolboxes. It'll become unmanageable and it won't be
>>> consistent also.
>>>
>>> Generally we follow the first method, as cApp will copy the artifacts in
>>> the respective servers' deployment directory,
>>>
>>
>> From Carbon 4.2.0 onward this is going to change. We will no longer be
>> doing async deployments.
>>
>
> What does that actually mean? .. the CAR deployment itself is async right?
> .. and also, what about the scenarios where we expect the actual artifact
> to be in the deployment directory, for example, data services, proxy
> services and all, because the user will be editing those and deploying
> again, and those changes will reflect in their deployment directories.
>
> Cheers,
> Anjana.
>
>
>>
>> Kishanthan will be able to provide more info on these changes.
>>
>> Thanks and Regards,
>> Harshana
>>
>>> and the specific deployer will handle the deployment logic for that
>>> artefact.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Sinthuja.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 1:11 PM, Ayashkantha Ramasinghe <
>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> The "BAM car file deployer" is created to deploy toolboxes in the
>>>> server as a cApp. I have two approaches,
>>>>
>>>> 1. to copy the toolbox to bam-toolbox directly and let the toolbox
>>>> deployer run automatically and deploy the toolbox.
>>>> 2. to deploy the toolbox using the code while deploying cApp without
>>>> copying the toolbox to bam-toolbox directory directly.
>>>>
>>>> In 1st approach, we can go and manually see the toolbox deployed inside
>>>> the directory, bam-toolbox. But, in the 2nd approach, we can't see or
>>>> undeploy it manually, only cApp undeployment does the undeployment of the
>>>> toolbox.
>>>>
>>>> I am also thinking that the 1st approach is good, but, for now, the
>>>> deployer is created based on the 2nd approach.
>>>>
>>>> WDYT???
>>>>
>>>> Thank you
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Ayashkantha Ramasinghe
>>>> Software Engineer
>>>>
>>>> Tel: +94 777 487 669
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> *Sinthuja Rajendran*
>>> Software Engineer <http://wso2.com/>
>>> WSO2, Inc.:http://wso2.com
>>>
>>> Blog: http://sinthu-rajan.blogspot.com/
>>> Mobile: +94774273955
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Harshana Martin
>> Associate Technical Lead
>> WSO2 Inc. : http://wso2.com
>>
>> Mobile: +94 775 998 115
>> Profile: https://www.google.com/profiles/harshana05
>> Blog: http://harshana05.blogspot.com
>> Twitter: http://twitter.com/harshana05
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Architecture mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> *Anjana Fernando*
> Technical Lead
> WSO2 Inc. | http://wso2.com
> lean . enterprise . middleware
>
> _______________________________________________
> Architecture mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>
>


-- 
============================
Srinath Perera, Ph.D.
   http://people.apache.org/~hemapani/
   http://srinathsview.blogspot.com/
_______________________________________________
Architecture mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture

Reply via email to