On 15/11/2008, at 5:08 AM, David Jencks wrote:
On Nov 14, 2008, at 12:40 AM, Gianny Damour wrote:
Hi,
The definition of mark-up interfaces may require the definition of
a specific mark-up interface for each deployer type. For instance,
a MBE may be specific to Tomcat and not to Jetty. Hence we may
need WebMBE, TomcatMBE amd JettyMBE.
1. So far we don't have any examples of such MBEs
2. Even if we did, this can easily be handled with a single WebMBE
interface by not deploying the e.g. JettyMBEImpl on a tomcat server.
Indeed, we do not have an example yet. Let's assume that we do.
Also for kind of the same reason than giving a deployer reference
to the MBE does not work, the mark-up interface is not the silver-
bullet as it is not flexible enough: you may have two deployers
and you may only want to add the MBE to one of them.
I can't think of a remotely plausible example of this, could you
suggest one?
Let's also assume that we have Jetty and Tomcat deployers running in
the same server. In this situation, we cannot selectively deploy the
MBE as the server is running our two deployers and you only want to
update one of them.
Obviously the above point w/o an actual example is moot. Do you think
that we will never see a deployer specific MBE?
The explicit addition of a reference pattern provides the best
flexibility. As pointed out, it requires some explicit
configuration. However it is already supported through two
mechanisms: manual update of config.xml or script deployment.
True, but it is not a declarative solution to the problem, it
involves procedural code. Since we've gotten everything else to
work with a declarative solution I'd like to see if we can solve
this problem declaratively also.
OK. I have started to believe that XML declarations should be
replaced by DSLs. Also, the introduction of mark-up interfaces
increases the number of things that developers need to know. What do
you think of using annotations instead of interfaces? This is the
preferred style I think.
Thanks,
Gianny
thanks
david jencks
Thanks,
Gianny
On 14/11/2008, at 4:58 AM, Vamsavardhana Reddy wrote:
I agree that we need a general solution to dynamically add MBEs.
The trick that Gianny showed does got me going with the Tuscany
plugin work that I am doing.
On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 11:21 PM, David Jencks
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
These solutions certainly work but don't address the fundamental
problem of adding MBE's dynamically to some builders and not
others. For instance we can just modify the tomcat6-deployer
plan right now to include the tuscany MBE and guess that
eventually we'll have a jetspeed MBE and try to think of some
more. But when someone comes up with a new one we didn't imagine
-- jspwiki MBE or something -- they'll have to update the list
again. I would like to solve the problem once and for all so
that no specific configuration for particular MBE's is needed.
Making the reference go the other way -- giving the MBE a
reference to the web deployer -- won't work well for the same
reason, we don't know how many web deployers there will be next
week, even if we only have two this week.
thanks
david jencks
On Nov 13, 2008, at 3:21 AM, Vamsavardhana Reddy wrote:
Thanks Gianny. I could add the MBE to TomcatBuilder by
modifying config.xml. I have added the following gbean under
"org.apache.geronimo.configs/tomcat6-deployer/2.1.3/car" to
modify the reference to include a new MBE:
<gbean name="TomcatWebBuilder">
<reference name="ModuleBuilderExtensions">
<pattern>
<name>PersistenceUnitBuilder</name>
</pattern>
<pattern>
<name>JspModuleBuilderExtension</name>
</pattern>
<pattern>
<name>MyFacesModuleBuilderExtension</name>
</pattern>
<pattern>
<name>TuscanyModuleBuilderExtension</name>
</pattern>
</reference>
</gbean>
On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 4:10 PM, Gianny Damour
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 13/11/2008, at 10:08 AM, David Jencks wrote:
On Nov 12, 2008, at 1:07 PM, Vamsavardhana Reddy wrote:
As part of deploying SCA enhanced Web Applications in Geronimo
with Tuscany Plugin, I am looking to add a
ModuleBuilderExtension (MBE) to TomcatModuleBuilder and a
NamingBuilder. The purpose of the MBE is to add SCA related
EmbeddedRuntimeGBean to the web application config which will
deploy the application composite to the SCA domain. The purpose
of the NamingBuilder is to add SCA Domain and other objects
(required for injection of SCA references in servlets etc.) into
the WebAppContext. I am seeing that the MBE and NamingBuilder
GBeans which are added as part of the Tuscany Plugin can not get
dynamically added to the MBEs configured in tomcat6-builder
config and NamingBuilders configured in j2ee-deployer config.
The one option I see is to update the plan.xml files in tomcat6-
builder and j2ee-deployer configs and rebuild the server. But
this won't be like the MBE and NamingBuilder is getting added as
part of Tuscany-plugin installation. The other option is to add
(don't know if it is easy to do this hack) the MBE and
NamingBuilder to the corresponding collections in
TomcatModuleBuilder and NamingBuilder GBeans. I appreciate any
suggestions/comments or inputs on any alternate approach that I
am not seeing.
Yup, this is a problem. So far we've sidestepped it by just
adding all the known desired MBE's to the appropriate *-deployer
plan, and as you have found this is non-extensible.
I do not understand why overriding the relevant
TomcatModuleBuilder GBean pattern in config.xml does not work.
This is better than having to redeploy the tomcat6-builder plugin.
If the problem is to provide a way to update the tomcat6-builder
plugin when the Tuscany Plugin is installed, then an approach is
to package within the Tuscany plugin a script to update the
reference patterns of the GBean TomcatWebBuilder. For instance,
by dropping a file named
GBeansTuscanyEnhancer.groovy
in the folder
repository/org/apache/geronimo/configs/tomcat6-deployer/2.*/
tomcat6-deployer-2.*.car/
which kind of looks like (indicative...)
import org.apache.geronimo.gbean.AbstractNameQuery
def tomcatWebBuilderGBean = gbeanDatas.find
{ it.gbeanInfo.className ==
'org.apache.geronimo.tomcat.deployment.TomcatModuleBuilder' }
def moduleBuilderExtensionsPatterns =
tomcatWebBuilderGBean.getReferencePatterns
('ModuleBuilderExtensions')
Set newPatterns = []
newPatterns.addAll(moduleBuilderExtensionsPatterns.patterns)
newPatterns.add(new AbstractNameQuery(new URI
(PUT_YOUR_TUSCANY_MBE_PATTERN_NAME_HERE)))
tomcatWebBuilderGBean.setReferencePatterns(newPatterns)
You should be done.
Thanks,
Gianny
One possiblitly would be to define marker interfaces such as
WebMBE, EjbMBE, etc that the appropriate MBE's could implement
and use the interface in the references pattern.
Anyone have a better idea?
thanks
david jencks
Thanks,
Vamsi
--
Vamsi
--
Vamsi
