On 2/14/11 12:01 PM, David M. Lloyd wrote:
On 02/14/2011 11:27 AM, Brian Stansberry wrote:
> Thinking out loud here, could we use the module dependency
information
> for this? Nah, that would just say, e.g. that JCA needs the JTA APIs,
> but says nothing about the impl.
I don't think module deps would cut it for this use case. The
dependency exists at purely a subsystem level, not at a module level,
and imposing a constraint between the two just for this reason really
rubs me the wrong way; anyway module dependencies are not by any means
static (we just use them that way, most of the time) and are definitely
not suitable as management layer metainformation.
I agree that module deps and subsystem deps are essentially orthogonal.
However, adding "slimming" support (not something needed for 7.0), would
require that we have way to group chunks of functionality that can be
removed from the module repo. The majority of this could be dynamically
resolved by starting at all used subsystem entry points (implies we
need a convention here), resolving the full dep tree, and building a
purge list for modules that are never referenced. The challenge is
modules which are referenced by name (e.g. typically used to build refs
for deployments). So we may need a way for a subsystem to register
by-name stuff in some way.
Anyway we don't have to solve this now, I just wanted to point out that
there is a limited relationship.
--
Jason T. Greene
JBoss, a division of Red Hat