I have to agree with David. Part of the "distribute" step will involve ensuring that the package is runnable (validation, generating any required code, etc.), and another part is generating a living MBean with which the archive/application can be started, removed, etc. I don't think it's sufficient to simply place the file somewhere. And I also agree with David that the deployment scanner should feed into the deployment logic and not vice versa.
Aaron On Wed, 15 Oct 2003, David Jencks wrote: > > This is an approach. What do you think of the following one: > > > > When a module is distributed, it is stored in a passive directory. > > When this module needs to be started, one adds to the deployment > > scanner its URL and the standard deployment process kicks off. > > > > To distribute a module in an auto-deploy folder will be a two step > > process: firstly upload it in a passive directory (one does not want a > > module being distributed to be retrieved by a scanner) and then move > > it to the auto-deploy folder. So, why not do it "in-place". > > > > I think relying on scanning and scanning-driven hot deployment for > anything is a big mistake. I think that whatever the "official" > deployment method is, the scanner should simply be one input to it. > You should be able to have a "locked down" Geronimo instance with no > scanners. > > When Geronimo can remember its state between shutdowns, I think it will > appear much less important to have a scanner. k
