[Hawkular-dev] The components, glue and kettle

[Gary Brown]

+1 to integration tests (for bus and REST) being local within the component repo as well.

----- Original Message -----
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Gary Brown" <gbrown at redhat.com>
> > To: "Discussions around Hawkular development"
> > <hawkular-dev at lists.jboss.org>
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2015 10:02:31 AM
> > Subject: [Hawkular-dev] The components, glue and kettle
> > 
> > Hi
> > 
> > On yesterday's watercooler discussion the main topic was about how to
> > package
> > the individual components, with the "glue" code, within kettle.
> > 
> > There seems to be a general idea to move all bus integration code into
> > Hawkular/Kettle repo. Although I agree that the kettle is the right place
> > to
> > bring together the components and glue, not sure whether the actual code
> > for
> > the glue should reside in that single repo.
> > 
> > My preference would be for all component related code, including that
> > component's integration with the bus, to be located in that component repo
> > -
> > that way there is a clear owner of the code, and any changes to the core
> > APIs are locally dealt across all integration points that may be supported.
> > 
> > Then the kettle repo can be responsible for selecting the relevant
> > artifacts
> > to build what it requires.
> > 
> 
> +1
> 
> > In terms of how the 'core' artifacts from each component should be enhanced
> > with the glue - may be the simplest way would be as one person suggested -
> > use an overlay to build upon the 'core' war artifact to add the glue
> > artifacts (which in general will probably just be bus integration). So each
> > component only needs to produce a single 'core' war, but also manages the
> > integration artifacts locally.
> > 
> > I think I would prefer this approach over a single ear, as it still retains
> > the individual component boundaries but enhances them with whatever they
> > need to communicate in the kettle.
> > 
> > It would be even more ideal if jboss modules allowed exploded wars, so that
> > we didn't need to use overlays, but I don't believe this is the case.
> > 
> 
> My only open question about packaging is about which one is better for
> integration testing.
> 
> I like the idea to have in the component integration tests beyond simple
> junits, it can help to test REST/Accounts/Bus integration as well as other
> minor regressions before to put a component in hawkular (the artist known as
> kettle).
> 
> But the integration tests perhaps it can be discussed in future threads :-).
> 
> > Regards
> > Gary
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > hawkular-dev mailing list
> > hawkular-dev at lists.jboss.org
> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hawkular-dev
> > 
> _______________________________________________
> hawkular-dev mailing list
> hawkular-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hawkular-dev
>