As long as we can run both the Java EE and CDI TCKs with the webapps dir
approach I don't care where the code lives -- it's just one class so far.

Note the CDI TCK doesn't use the VmDeployer.

-David

On Monday, November 7, 2011, Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]>
wrote:
> yep, exactly,
>
> this deployer doesn't give any feature to the user or to us to be honest,
> it is just common for us but we doesn't need it because the code is really
> simple and could be part of the VmDeployer impl.
>
> So yes a separated module can be better...
>
>
> maybe i'm alone to think it so feel free to give your opinion.
>
> - Romain
>
>
> 2011/11/7 Jonathan Gallimore <[email protected]>
>
>> Are you thinking you'd prefer the deployer to be part of the tck, or a
>> module in its own right?
>>
>> I don't have a strong view either way, as long as the TCK setup is doing
>> the right thing. Maybe our Arquillian adapters should be using this
method
>> as well?
>>
>> Jon
>> On Nov 7, 2011 7:15 PM, "Romain Manni-Bucau" <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > ok but the webappdeployer is not linked to the deployment at all, just
to
>> > the way we deploy tcks so should we keep this ejb on trunk?
>> >
>> > - Romain
>> >
>> >
>> > 2011/11/7 David Blevins <[email protected]>
>> >
>> > >
>> > > On Nov 6, 2011, at 4:22 PM, Jonathan Gallimore wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > My understanding - and this might be wrong - is that the existing
>> > > > DeployerEjb behaves differently to just dropping the .war file in
the
>> > > > webapps directory. When we deploy using DeployerEjb, OpenEJB
>> processes
>> > > the
>> > > > .war file first, and then hands it off to Tomcat. Dropping the war
in
>> > the
>> > > > webapps folder on the other hand, means Tomcat processes the .war
>> file
>> > > > first and then OpenEJB gets its turn.
>> > > >
>> > > > I think the goal here is for the TCK to be as close to dropping the
>> > > > archives in the webapps folders as a user would do as possible.
>> > >
>> > > Right.  Close as in identical :)  Unless we're going to tell people
>> > "don't
>> > > drop apps in webapps/", we should test it.
>> > >
>> > > Next step is to get the VmDeploymentManager class updated so the impl
>> can
>> > > be configurable.  Then update the "runtests" script so the
>> implementation
>> > > cab be set for a test run.  Then of course to try a test or two to
>> verify
>> > > that all works.
>> > >
>> > > Then we can kick off an entire run with that approach and see where
we
>> > > land.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > -David
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>>
>

Reply via email to