On 7/11/11 12:19 PM, Brian Stansberry wrote:
On 7/11/11 10:22 AM, Jim Crossley wrote:
> Bob McWhirter<bmcwhirt(a)redhat.com> writes:
>
> [...]
>
>> Dunno if it'd help, but generally supporting a deployments/myapp.link
>> deployment, where the myapp.link file is just a text file containing
>> only and exactly the path to an exploded application, might be useful.
>
> Other benefits include:
>
> 1) no complicated marker file extension state machine required.
>
> 2) it opens the door for us to deploy things that don't necessarily
> match "^.*\\.[SsWwJjEeRr][Aa][Rr]$", e.g. our torquebox .knob files.
>
> Yes, I know the expression is a "standard" (or is it? are .sar's
> standard?), but it seems arbitrarily restrictive to those of us desirous
> of the JBoss awesomeness without all the JEE goo. :)
>
That pattern can certainly be made configurable; I'd accept a patch for
that.
I lied; no I wouldn't. ;)
Having something injected into FileSystemDeploymentService from which it
can query supported types makes more sense, with extensions able to
update that object to register types they support.
I don't see how the .link thing removes the need for having the
scanner
understand the .knob extension, unless .link is effectively a trojan
that hides the actual content location from the management system.
--
Brian Stansberry
Principal Software Engineer
JBoss by Red Hat