On 2/15/07, Danny Angus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 2/15/07, David Woldrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Past that, it sounds like from past conversations that the deployment of
> James as a Geronimo plugin might be made more worthwhile if we did the
> refactoring to make multiple independent sub-systems out of what is
> currently in James.
+1 I think if we do this then we'll get the deployment options as a
beneficial side-effect.
If we go straight for deployment options we may end up dividing at the
wrong points of inflexion or inadvertently coding round specific
deployment issues within the bits and bobs.
+1
> Perhaps I could take each sub-system at a time and
> try to get it to deploy as a plugin?
Sounds like a plan.
+1
we don't need to complete the modularisation, just modularise the
subsystem to be deployed on geronimo. if you have a few cycles this
weekend then maybe you could help pull out a suitable subsystem.
opinions on the best subsystem to choose?
- robert
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
