[jboss-dev-forums] [Embedded JBoss Development] - Re: embedded and bootsrap dependencies

[emuckenhuber]

"ALRubinger" wrote : 
  | From what I can tell, we'd just be moving the problem, as we have to integrate somewhere.  Seems what you're proposing is moving jboss-bootstrap-api-embedded and impl-embedded under the org.jboss.embedded umbrella again (where I had it originally, actually ;)).  
  | 
Yes, i think it's better under it's own umbrella :)
"ALRubinger" wrote : 
  | As currently set up, this won't affect AS as AS doesn't depend upon it.  And AS can't really affect it either; that's why there's the TMPDPL "Container" API.  Now api-embedded doesn't have a dependency on even VDF.  Container becomes the locked SPI.
  | 
  | Does that solve the backwards-compat issue sufficiently for you? 

Hmm, we could briefly talk about the deployable as well - as i can tell for sure that ProfileService won't expose a VDF deployment.
Maybe we want to just rename the VfsVdfDeployableFactory to a DeployableFactory? In the end it should not really matter what deployable is created and i don't think there should be 2 different types - like VdfDeployable and PSDeployable - at the same time.

Is there an additional use for the deployable in general? I guess it would be used when having a DSL attaching the actual deployment descriptor instead of a reference to a xml?

[OT] out of curiosity - it seems that when creating a deployable you are creating a zip out of the shrinkwrap in-memory archive.
When i first looked at the archive stuff - i thought you are directly deploying this in-memory VirtualFile. Is there a specific reason why you don't do that?
Well, as it gets zipped it could be interesting to use that also in standalone testing.

View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4261116#4261116

Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4261116