A good concern but I don't think we'll need to do this.
Each module in the EAR can be deployed standalone where we only get the single plan allowed by JSR-88; therefore we need to be able to nest plans for other things such as webservices or portlets inside that single plan.
The ANY element in the EAR contains the same single plan as would be used for that module standalone.
I don't think we've figured out how the stuff from DConfigBeans would get mapped down to that. When we do, it needs to come down to a single XML document that can be written as a deployment plan and hence which can be nested in a single ANY element.
-- Jeremy
Aaron Mulder wrote:
So it looks like our EAR deployment plan can hold nested
deployment plans for all the modules within it, using the "any" area of
the module element in the geronimo-application.xml.
I'm concerned that we may eventually want more than one nested
deployment plan per module. For example, a module that uses web services
would have a separate web services DD. Will we combine both the web
services and standard settings into one Geronimo plan, or would we have,
for example, a "Geronimo EJB" and "Geronimo Web Services" plan for the
same EJB JAR?
In JSR-88, the API allows you to access each J2EE deployment descriptor separately, and provide server-specific DConfigBeans for it.
Each DConfigBean is tied to a specific DDBean (J2EE DD element), so it wouldn't really be possible for us to properly reflect the Geronimo-specific DD elements for both web services and standard J2EE modules without having separate DConfigBean trees for each.
Still, we could take the two sets of DConfigBeans and merge them
somehow and write out a single deployment plan... So we're not
necessarily tied to having separate files.
Anyway, if we do think we'll want multiple deployment plans for each module, we should probably change the EAR plan structure to take a group of file name/any pairs instead of just a single any.
Aaron
