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
>>>
>>
>