"scott.stark(a)jboss.org" wrote : | I suppose this is where I'm currently out of synch. I see too much vfs related structure parsing happening in the structural deployers. I would rather have clearer steps to the structural part of deployment: | | 1. establish a vfs that encapsulates both the protocol for accessing raw files and structural layout in terms of a root VirtualFile and its children. By this I mean a tree of names is defined, and the basic attributes of the nodes in the tree are defined. This means marking files as ears, ejb-jar, wars, etc. | 2. structural deployers come along and identify the virtual file relationships in terms of classpaths, metadata descriptors, etc. | I completely disagree. The notion of ear, ejb-jar is not a VFS concept it is a deployment concept. I'd be more inclined to make the "isArchive" a deployment concept thus removing it from the VFS layer into the structure deployers. But this would mean the structure deployers would need to be an externalisable component such that the VFSScanner instead of doing: | if (file.isLeaf()) | deploy(file); | else if (file.isDirectory() || file.isArchive()) | deploy(file); | else | scan(file); | It would do: | if (structureDeployers.isDeployment(file)) | deploy(file); | else if (isLeaf() == false) | scan(file); | But there is a missing else in the last part where we have an unrecognised leaf node that is unknown to the main deployer so it can't report it as "undetermined structure". View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3975106#... Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&a...