> will you also use the part of the interface, that would allow the user to accept the
terms and conditions in Eclipse? It may look better if you do.
> David Hladky
Yes, David, we will definitely be using that part of the interface.
Considering that the download-manager is set to be released and in production soon,
I'm really not sure I can expect your team to make changes to the workflow,
Aren't we the only one that are clients of this ? Then there should not be a problem
fixing it. The whole idea/reason for rest API is for our usecase. David - correct me if
I'm wrong here ?
responses, etc. I think at this point it's more likely to break
stuff. But I'll list the problems so far:
1) Each rest entry point response does not point to the next step in the workflow
2) This means a client (like jbt) must assume the workflow
3) This means that if you guys need to add steps to the workflow in the future, you
can't, without breaking clients
4) It also means that we must hard-code each url (tc, tc-accepted, tc-accept, file)
and that these become API and can never be renamed.
5) Even if you added the next url as part of the response, your initial entry point is
basically the service "tc-accepted", which seems a strange name to begin the
The only part of this I see as 'dangerous' really is item 3) and 4). You guys
won't be able to add steps to the workflow without breaking clients. Item 1) is
annoying, though, as it means we can't simply put the url to the download-manager with
its attribute in stacks.yaml.
Considering time is tight and I doubt the download-manager team can make the changes
above, For stacks.yaml, I like Rafael's suggestion:
Okey I'm lost here. Aren't the URL the downloadmanager can be handed the exact
same as what a browser can open and the user will be walked through the urls ?
Jdf website will use that download URL just as is in a plain href.
Only clients like jbt that does not want to jump to the browser to download would have to
trigger special treatment. Which for me seems sufficient to put in a label ?
JBT would then recognize the prefix, chop it off, and use that string
as what we pass to download-manager's rest services.
No other client can use that URL for anything so I really don't like that approach.
Perhaps stacks can have a property somewhere in its client jar that
lists the download manager's root url, to avoid multiple clients having it hard-coded
everywhere. (Rafael, if you think it doesn't belong there, I guess jbt can just have
it hard-coded or pulled from somewhere, but I think if stacks is listing download-manager
urls in the stacks.yaml, it should list the URL of the rest services somewhere, for
example inside jdf-stacks-client / src / main / resources / org / jboss / jdf / stacks /
client / config.properties where you list the stacks url and pre-stacks url)
Assuming Rafael's solution doesn't offend anyone, I think it's the best we
have for now.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Rob Stryker" <rstryker(a)redhat.com>
> To: "David Hladky" <dhladky(a)redhat.com>, "Rafael Benevides"
<benevides(a)redhat.com>, "Snjezana Peco" <snjezana.peco(a)redhat.com>,
"jbosstools-dev jbosstools-dev" <jbosstools-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
> Sent: Friday, 21 February, 2014 9:24:13 AM
> Subject: $0 subscription downloads - Stacks integration with download manager
> Rafael (and others):
> So I spent an hour or so yesterday chatting with David Hladky about the
> new download manager rest services which JBosstools intends to use to
> help us download EAP 6.x. It allows for a workflow that can help us get
> terms and conditions, verify credentials, verify agreements have been
> signed, and then provide a download utility with a temporary url that
> expires to download the EAP.
> The api and the test server I played with look good so far. JBossTools,
> though, pulls all of its runtime information from jdf-stacks. We
> typically pull our download urls from there.
> Currently in stacks, community editions have a "url" for the project
> page, and a "downloadUrl" for a link to a permanent url for the given
> runtime to download.
> EAP instances in stacks.yaml only have a url for a project page. When
> the download manager written by David goes live, we'll need to consider
> what to do for stacks.yaml, and I'd prefer to get this stuff sorted now.
> I'd like to suggest that we add a new attribute "downloadManagerUrl".
> This will ensure clients know that this is a workflow url and not a
> static url for downloading a file.
> There's 2 parts to the rest service written by David. First is the rest
> service url itself, and the second is the file we're requesting.
> Currently a url for one part of the rest workflow (in this example, to
> get terms and conditions) looks like this:
> You can see the two parts are the rest service url (on test server,
) and the second part
> is what we're requesting (in this case,
> I see a few problems here. The first is that, in my opinion, those urls
> are pretty long to be including in stacks.yaml... but luckily the
> download-manager allows for shortened urls, so we could have the
> download-manager server respond to a url like
> The download manager would then map the attribute to the
> /content/blah/blah/sha path and proceed accordingly. So this is easily
> The second, is that the rest services do not point to the next url to
> request. For example, if I go to the tc-accepted rest service to see if
> the terms and conditions were accepted yet, it does not point me to the
> next url in the workflow. Because of this, there's really no single
> entry-point in the workflow, and each rest service url is kind of a
> standalone url.
> With the second point in mind, we might just want our stacks.yaml
> attribute to say downloadManagerPath=jboss-eap-6.0.0.dv.ci-installer.jar.
> The client (in this case jbosstools) would pass that string to the
> download manager rest service it chooses to use. The download-manager
> server would resolve jboss-eap-6.0.0.dv.ci-installer.jar to its more
> specific /content/sha256/23423823423/etc path, and proceed normally.
> One concern with this approach is that the stacks.yaml will never
> include the actual url of the rest service entry point. Even if we
> wanted to have stacks.yaml point to the entry point, there's no one
> entry-point since the rest services do not point to the next step in the
> I personally have no problem using the service as it's written now, and
> with stacks.yaml only having a shortened path available, but I wanted to
> get your (and others) feedback on the situation before this gets pushed
> to production, after which we probably won't have much chance to change it.
> Any thoughts?
> - Rob Stryker
jbosstools-dev mailing list