exactly that. --- Srihari S <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Correct me if i am wrong...based on the emerging > j2ee 1.4 stds any j2ee > server will have to use the deployment apis.. > i mean the new javax.deployment apis... > my question is will the apis that ur suggesting end > up/can be adapted to > become an implementation of this javax.deployment > package? > I haven't started seeing this javax.deployment apis > spec...but just a > thought? > anyway we will have to write an implementation for > this pack also at some > point of time to get compliance.. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jonathan Duty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 6:32 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: J2EE deployment verifier > > > I would say we start out by designing an API that > gerinomo can use to > verify deployments. Then we can build a stand alone > application around > that (basically put in a main function etc). > > I know a few people were talking about building a > GUI interface to > Gerinomo for deployment/monitoring. That may be a > good place to start > asking how they would like to integrate. > > ~Jonathan > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Srihari S > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 9:05 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: J2EE deployment verifier > > never mind ur choice of words....if we end up using > the rule engine > concept > it will because of u:) > So at a very hi level we can look at the verifier as > > Input Process Output > > JAR Verify the correctness OK/NOK with > error log > WAR by parsing the DD > EAR and applying correctness > RAR rules > > > While it is true that the verifier can be a > standalone app and we must > design its internals in this spirit > it may also be worthwhile to decide early on how it > will get into the > geronimo frwk > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Weston M. Price [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 2:04 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: J2EE deployment verifier > > > As a modular component I think this J2EE verifier > engine/processor would > be > very useful in a number of projects; it could even > be a standalone > module > that would allow a developer to validate their > archive before ever even > trying to deploy it in a target environment. Of > course, you wouldn't be > able > to see those 100+ line stack traces roll across your > tty when you go to > deploy your archive; that would be the one > drawback.... > > Regards, > > Weston > > On Monday 11 August 2003 08:26 am, Weston M. Price > wrote: > > Yeah, I knew that term was going to come back at > me, poor choice of > words > > on my part. I was basically thinking in terms of > "rules" as conditions > that > > need to be satisfied to fulfill a deployment; not > in terms of a full > blown > > rules engine (though this would be somewhat > interesting). At the very > core > > what you really have is a set of conditions that > when applied to a > > deployable unit (EAR, WAR, SAR etc) must be met > for the archive to be > > deployed. A verifier exists as sort of a watchdog > that prevents > archives > > from violating a discreet set of constraints. > > > > Regards, > > > > Weston > > > > On Monday 11 August 2003 12:36 pm, Srihari S > wrote: > > > i did not have this rule engine picture when i > started thinking abt > this > > > verifier.. > > > ru looking at the design of some open src rule > engines for designing > this > > > verifier? > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Weston M. Price > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 12:12 PM > > > To: Srihari S; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Subject: Re: J2EE deployment verifier > > > > > > > > > It's an interesting subject for a few reasons: > > > What we are really talking about is a type of > rules engine where > certain > > > conditions have to be met to achieve a > successful "deployment". The > most > > > intriguing aspect, at least to me, would be to > make this module > > > extensible and "forward looking" because we all > know that > specifications > > > are static and never change right? :-) As > Geronimo grows with J2EE > (and > > > all its associated specifications) the engine > would similarly have > to > > > grow as well and accommodate the new standards. > This could make for > some > > > interesting design and implementation decisions. > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Weston > > > > > > Of course we all know that specification > requirements never change > right > > > > > > On Monday 11 August 2003 10:54 am, Srihari S > wrote: > > > > I agree with you Weston..this is a good > staarting point to gain > > > > > > familiarity > > > > > > > with the specs > > > > Count me in too.:)) > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Weston M. Price > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 12:01 PM > > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Subject: Re: J2EE deployment verifier > > > > > > > > > > > > I think this would actually be quite > interesting to work on. Man, > if > > > > there is > > > > a way to become familiar with the J2EE > specs....this is it! > > > > > > > > If you wanted someone to work with on this I > would be happy to > help. > === message truncated ===
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
