Re: [jbosstools-dev] Regarding Stacks, Runtimes, and Remote Descriptors

>>We also got runtimes like drools and seam which aren't exactly servers. >In the classification we've used, Drools and Seam aren't runtimes, they are frameworks - the key difference being they are embedded into an existing app, and they don't require you to start the JVM. > >We can add this to stacks.yml, but I wonder whether runtimes is the right place to put it. Yes. That's the kind of discussion that is recurrent :) - To refresh what we discussed about it, we decided that we will use these runtimes (drools, seam, etc) under runtimes section. On that occasion (stacks cr1 release), we decided to created the 'runtime-category' label to distinguish these runtime types. I'll improve the tests to make this label required to all runtimes. We need only to decide what 'runtime-category' to use for these other "runtimes".

>>Also, can we have runtimes listed without having matching archetypes ? >>i.e. if we would like to move all our existing info over to stacks.yml >>instead of having it spread over we would need this runtime list without >>having matching bom's etc. Yes. it's is possible to have a runtime with a 'empty list' of archetypes and boms. The tests only complains about having an archetype or a bom that isn't used on any runtime.