I'm not sure where this quote came from: "There's no such thing as an
easy fix, only delayed product releases."
;-)
Mark.
On 22 Mar 2007, at 15:41, Tom Fennelly wrote:
+1000000
I've been burned too many times by that last minute "easy" fix/
feature :-)
Mark Little wrote:
> Given past experience, let's not try to shoe-horn in anything that
> seems easy at the last minute ;-)
>
> Mark.
>
>
> On 22 Mar 2007, at 15:21, Tom Fennelly wrote:
>
>> For now, I'm working on getting it working via the AS. If we get
>> a chance to try out adding WS to the standalone, great, otherwise
>> we should still have it working via the AS.
>>
>> T.
>>
>>
>> Mark Little wrote:
>>>
>>> On 22 Mar 2007, at 12:36, Kurt T Stam wrote:
>>>
>>>> The TB really only needs WS (annotations, jsr 181). This should
>>>> actually
>>>> be core to ESB! It is not in the standalone right now to make
>>>> it light,
>>>> and b/c we don't fully suppoer WS yet. But maybe we should do some
>>>> investigation to add this in for this release?
>>>
>>>
>>> There's a task that was assigned to Daniel for this for post MP.
>>> However, I'm uncomfortable about adding this at this stage, so
>>> let's leave it until later.
>>>
>>> Mark.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I think the TB readme says you need the "ejb3" profile, but I
>>>> think that
>>>> had to do with the annotation support. Bill, we should be able
>>>> to get WS
>>>> + annotation support without EJB3 stuff right? It's be nice to
>>>> get the
>>>> TB running out of the box.
>>>>
>>>> --Kurt
>>>>
>>>> Mark Little wrote:
>>>>> We're OK for this release. We need to re-examine the TB anyway
>>>>> after
>>>>> MP goes out. But as you know, having everything run and work
>>>>> out-of-the-box with zero config effort is what we've been
>>>>> striving for
>>>>> for a while. I think we're not too bad.
>>>>>
>>>>> Mark.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 22 Mar 2007, at 10:16, Tom Fennelly wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> 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(a)lists.jboss.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/esb-dev
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
_______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>> esb-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>> esb-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
<mailto:esb-dev@lists.jboss.org>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/esb-dev
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>> ------------
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>> esb-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>>>> esb-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>>>>>>>>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/esb-dev
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> esb-dev mailing list
>>>>>>> esb-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>>>>>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/esb-dev
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>