The TB and the console currently require EJB3. Therefore, for this
release we require the user to run both of these on a full AS install.
For the TB, this means running against JBossMQ instead of JBM.
Otherwise, the user has to install JBM on their AS, which is not
something we should be requiring them to do. Additionally, it's a
pain in the ass to do because it requires them to have Ant 1.7
installed on their system. It's probably something they'd not want
to do anyway - "I'm not screwing with my AS install just to get a
sample working" :-)
Getting the TB to work against both MQ and JBM is no big deal - I
tested it with one of the quickstarts.
So, my point is... while from a purest standpoint it might be "nicer"
to not ship EJB3 (or whatever) as part of the esb-server, it
certainly seems as though it might make life easier in a lot of
situations - both for us and the user. Once we have a fancy
installer we can make things optional. Just my opinion.
T.
Mark Little wrote:
+1
On 21 Mar 2007, at 22:03, Kurt T Stam wrote:
Good question. And we will have this discussion for JBESB-5.0: "Even
when everything is pluggable, What comes standard in it?". My
feeling is
that is should not come with JBESB by default as it is not core to
SOA/ESB, but if we really should have some installer functionality we
could make it easy to add them in, just like adding the ftp server,
email server etc. I looked into using the izPack thing before, which
looks pretty nice. We some customized version in JBossAS, which allows
remote installs etc. I think that may be the way to go (after MP1).
Bill Burke wrote:
Do we want to add EJB3 for busines_service? Probably add another
4meg to the distro. But we would have Hibernate too. Eventually
somebody will write the Hibernate/JPA actions that Burr suggested
during the meeting in Westford.
Kurt T Stam wrote:
Starting work on more_action
TODO
business_service (this is ejb3, and will require deploying to the
appserver)
webservice_war1 (this requires a WS stack, which also requires the
appserver).
Mark Little wrote:
I thought we decided on today's SILC meeting to postpone the jBPM
demo because of lack of time?
Mark.
On 21 Mar 2007, at 18:44, Kurt T Stam wrote:
OK I think we should leave aggregator alone, as it has no real
deployment now. I'm starting on fun_cbr.
TODO:
business_service
webservice_war1
jbpm_simple1
more_action
Kurt T Stam wrote:
The work that needs be done is building an .esb archive much like
the custom-action.jar but in addition it need to contain
a jboss-esb.xml in META-INF, and then changing the deployToSAR
task to deploy, which should deploy this archive to the
server/default/deploy directory. If the sample contains queue
definitions you may add this to the root of the .esb archive.
For most samples I'm leaving the "ant run" task to start esb
through the bootstrapper.
I'm taking static_router and simple_cbr right now.
Cheers,
--Kurt
Kurt T Stam wrote:
TODO:
aggregator
business_service
fun_cbr
webservice_war1
jbpm_simple1
more_action
simple_cbr
static_router
DONE:
helloworld
helloworld_action
helloworld_db_registration
helloworld_file_action
helloworld_ftp_action
helloworld_sql_action (I'm currently working on this one)
scripting_groovy
Bill Burke wrote:
We want to port the samples to the new .esb deployment right?
Divide
an conquer here? We each take a few?
_______________________________________________
esb-dev mailing list
esb-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/esb-dev
_______________________________________________
esb-dev mailing list
esb-dev@lists.jboss.org <mailto:esb-dev@lists.jboss.org>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/esb-dev
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
esb-dev mailing list
esb-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/esb-dev
_______________________________________________
esb-dev mailing list
esb-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/esb-dev