On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 14:14, Max Rydahl Andersen <max.andersen@redhat.com> wrote:

On Sep 20, 2011, at 05:18, Dan Allen wrote:

> On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 16:23, Paul Bakker <paul.bakker.nl@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think we're talking about two different things here
> 1) Deploying to AS7 using Shrinkwrap/Arquillian instead of file copies.
> This got me thinking, perhaps the Arquillian managed container should support both a remote deployment and a local deployment. The remote deployment is via the deployment APIs of a running server, whereas the local deployment is a file copy to a deployment directory. I'm hesitant to introduce another type of container in Arquillian, so perhaps it's just an aspect of a managed container...seems to fit best.

File copies definitely shouldn't go away since otherwise you are dependent on both the server running and the server being accessible to you for remote management calls.

Not something that is guaranteed in todays world - i.e. openshift servers or production servers aren't necessarily accessible for remote operations beyond file copies.

Right, which is why I think the Arquillian container adapters should support this deployment method, even if they aren't use for Arquillian tests. Aslak and ALR, got an opinion on where this feature should fit into the existing container organization?

Dan Allen
Principal Software Engineer, Red Hat | Author of Seam in Action
Registered Linux User #231597