[wildfly-dev] Deployment unit runtime-name - must it have a packaging type suffix?

[Brian Stansberry]

On Mon, Jan 8, 2018 at 9:25 AM, David Lloyd <david.lloyd at redhat.com> wrote:

> On Sun, Jan 7, 2018 at 7:37 PM, Stuart Douglas
> <stuart.w.douglas at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Sat, Jan 6, 2018 at 2:06 AM, Brian Stansberry
> > <brian.stansberry at redhat.com> wrote:
> >> On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 8:43 AM, David Lloyd <david.lloyd at redhat.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 8:20 AM, Brian Stansberry
> >>> <brian.stansberry at redhat.com> wrote:
> >>> > In practice the suffix is required. The deployment unit processors
> need
> >>> > to
> >>> > know whether they are interested in the deployment, and in the end
> that
> >>> > gets
> >>> > back to some DUP or other checking the suffix. The alternative would
> be
> >>> > DUPs
> >>> > speculatively digging into the deployment, checking for deployment
> >>> > descriptors or annotations and the like and that would be more
> >>> > expensive,
> >>> > likely buggy (e.g. false positives when some class in the classpath
> >>> > includes
> >>> > an annotation not relevant to the deployment) and could mess up some
> >>> > use
> >>> > cases where we want to defer classloading.
> >>>
> >>> Another alternative is for an early processor to identify the type,
> >>> tag it on to the deployment context, and then we modify all other DUPs
> >>> to use that information.  It seems pretty fragile to rely on the name,
> >>> particularly if that mechanism allows the "type" of deployment to
> >>> change in mid-deploy.
> >>
> >>
> >> I agree; if it's not done that way now, it should be. My *impression* is
> >> the general pattern was the way you describe, i.e. for each significant
> type
> >> some early DUP determines it's a relevant type and attaches some stuff
> and
> >> then later ones rely on the attachments. But my impression could very
> well
> >> be wrong in some or many cases. I haven't done much DUP work beyond code
> >> reviews or simple fixes since the AS 7.0 days.
> >>
> >> But that early processor still needs a way to identify type and I think
> >> that comes down to the suffix.
> >
> >
> > Yes, various early DUP's call
> > org.jboss.as.ee.structure.DeploymentTypeMarker#setType to set the
> deployment
> > type, but it is identified via suffix.
> >
> > As most deployment descriptors are optional there is no 100% reliable
> way of
> > identifying this other than the suffix.
>
> I guess I wasn't too clear.  I didn't mean to say there was some other
> way to detect the type.  I meant to say that the type determination
> should be done *before* the overridden runtime name is applied, not
> after.
>
>
I'm confused now. :)


-- 
Brian Stansberry
Manager, Senior Principal Software Engineer
Red Hat
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/wildfly-dev/attachments/20180108/3ad7d035/attachment.html