Hi Bertrand I think a partial descriptor approach is a requirement. Firstly, because it would be hard to transition to an "all or nothing" model in a single step. Secondly, partial deployments may work well in a customizable system: one descriptor is the vendor's deployment, the other contains the client's customizations.
So yes, the challenge is to define an intuitive way of letting the old and new worlds coexist in harmony. Regards Julian On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 8:51 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz <bdelacre...@apache.org> wrote: > On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 8:36 AM, Julian Sedding <jsedd...@gmail.com> wrote: >> ...By specifying the desired deployment state in a provisioning model file, >> the installer could make sure it has all required artifacts available (e.g. >> local folder, maven repository, etc). Once that is the case it could >> update/install/uninstall as it sees fit in order to attain the desired >> system state.... > > I've also been thinking about this lately. > > Are you thinking of an absolute approach as in "here's your new > provisioning model, forget everything and move to that new state" or a > relative/incremental one where a partial provisioning model specifies > additions and exclusions? > > The former moves us closer to the immutable instances idea, which I > like, but might be harder to manage when starting from a different > model. > > Creating an installer provider based on the provisioning model > shouldn't be hard in itself, but managing priorities and overrides > between the various installation tools could be trickier. > > -Bertrand
