Hi,
I agree with both of you that it should NOT be part of the core code,
thats why I suggested to refactor that section to support various different
types via a plugin, once it was working.
An external utility is an extra step that a developer needs to go through to
write beans, and results in two xml files..... It is much nicer just to have
one, this follows the "drop it in and run it" philosophy of JBoss. I was
thinking along the lines of having this behavior configurable in an MBean,
and off by default. If it was on then the server would also read in the
weblogic-ejb-jar.xml
regards,
-Rob
--
Robert Castaneda
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.customware.com/jboss
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Tom
Coleman
Sent: Monday, April 02, 2001 10:33 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] Support for WebLogic and other vendor jars
Scott wrote:
>
> I would rather not have knowledge of 3rd party app server deployment
> descriptors in the core JBoss code as it would only complicate
understanding
> of how the jboss.xml and standardjboss.xml descriptor are used. Its a fine
> idea but it could be implemented via a utility that transformed the app
> server specific jar into a jar with a jboss.xml descriptor.
>
Providing WL -> JBoss compatibility is an excellent idea.
I think that a "deployment conversion/translation utility" would be the way
to go, however. The utility could hopefully be expanded to deploy apps
packaged for other servers.
This approach might not be as intellectually stimulating as hacking the
deployer, but I agree with Scott that this logic belongs outside of the
core.
Tom
_______________________________________________
Jboss-development mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
_______________________________________________
Jboss-development mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
