[Design of JBoss Build System] - Re: maven-buildmagic-thirdparty-plugin Enhancements to put i
by ALRubinger
"pgier" wrote : I'm not sure how the WebDAV option would work because we don't currently have a snapshot repository for thirdparty stuff. Our thirdparty snapshots are handled the same as releases in the thirdparty repo by checking into svn. So we would need a new repository for that.
Oh, I was expecting to be able to use repository.jboss.org and write both snapshots and releases right in there.
dav:/> pwd
| Current collection is `https://repository.jboss.org/'.
| dav:/> ls
| Listing collection `/': succeeded.
| Coll: > admin 0 Dec 31 1969
| Coll: > labs 0 Mar 7 10:39
| > .svnignore 36 May 12 2005
| > remove-svn.sh 164 May 12 2005
| > set-ignore.sh 246 May 12 2005
...guess not?
"pgier" wrote : So I think option 1 or 3 makes more sense. I guess it's a question of how urgent it is. Is it mainly ejb builds that need to be uploaded regularly to the thirdparty repo?
That I'm aware of, just EJB3, but technically it's any Maven-based project that's imported as a 3rdparty lib. If this is a week or two, that's cool, I can just take care of it.
So sure, if we're going to be trashing 3rdparty soon, the problems mentioned here become conveniently rectified implicitly. :)
S,
ALR
View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4134885#4134885
Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4134885
18 years, 1 month
[Design of POJO Server] - Generalizing dependency injection
by scott.stark@jboss.org
What I'm currently working on is how we are redoing the ejb3 injection layer to be a generalized mc based version. The pieces are:
- The MappedReferenceMetaDataResolverDeployer creates a map of endpoint names to resolved names in the top DeploymentUnit under the attachment name MappedReferenceMetaDataResolverDeployer.endpointMap. The endpoint names are of the forms:
+ "ejb/" + vfsPath + ejbName : for ejbs in the deployment
+ "ejb/" + vfsPath + local-interface name : for BusinessLocals
+ "ejb/" + vfsPath + remote-interface name : for BusinessRemotes
+ "message-destination/" + vfsPath + destName : for MessageDestinations
- Each ee container creates KernelDeployment/BeanMetaData attachments for its components using a bean factory that ties into the container pooling. I'm fuzzy on the bean factory details in terms of whether the pooling is something that can live in the mc code.
- DependencyInjectionDeployer wires the beans together using the MappedReferenceMetaDataResolverDeployer referencer to referencee mappings to add the dependencies to the component BeanMetaData.
I'm currently looking at this in the context of the ejb2 deployer to see what issues show up for mixing mbean/mcbean components together. Once that is working the ejb3, client and war deployers can be updated in a similar fashion.
View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4134884#4134884
Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4134884
18 years, 1 month
[Design of JBoss Build System] - Re: maven-buildmagic-thirdparty-plugin Enhancements to put i
by pgier
"ALRubinger" wrote :
| How can we change this? Some ideas:
|
| * Enhance maven-buildmagic-thirdparty-plugin to automatically invoke appropriate SVN actions (either via Process to 'svn' or Java SVN lib)
|
| * Enhance maven-buildmagic-thirdparty-plugin to WebDAV the necessary artifacts and descriptors artifacts, overwriting what's there (Apache Slide, maybe). This solution is simpler but won't account for version control (in SVN anyway, I'm not sure what's hooked up under the DAV protocol supporting that location now).
|
| * Do nothing; Paul will be done with making 3rdparty go the way of the Dodo soon enough and everything will be in the Maven2 repos.
|
| Thoughts?
|
| S,
| ALR
I'm not sure how the WebDAV option would work because we don't currently have a snapshot repository for thirdparty stuff. Our thirdparty snapshots are handled the same as releases in the thirdparty repo by checking into svn. So we would need a new repository for that.
So I think option 1 or 3 makes more sense. I guess it's a question of how urgent it is. Is it mainly ejb builds that need to be uploaded regularly to the thirdparty repo?
View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4134881#4134881
Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4134881
18 years, 1 month