[jbosstools-dev] How old is ESB project?

[Rob Stryker]

I'd like to make changes to an ESB project's structure and I want to see 
if everyone here is on the same page.

The reason I'm asking is because conference calls with WTP have brought 
up interesting points.  The most important one, I feel, is how the 
component.xml file looks in these projects.  For example, here's a 
mapping from a web project:

 <wb-resource deploy-path="/WEB-INF/classes" source-path="/src"/>

Clearly this says we're mapping files in /src to /WEB-INF/classes. This 
isn't great because it means the module factory, rather than the virtual 
component framework, is in charge of mapping the src to the output 
folder, and it's very error prone. Obviously it'd make much more sense 
if the mapping looked more like this:

 <wb-resource deploy-path="/WEB-INF/classes" source-path="/build/classes"/>

This would clearly let the virtual component framework map directly the 
output folder to where ti belongs rather than make the deployable figure 
it out and map backwards.

Here's an example snippet from an ESB project component xml.

        <wb-resource deploy-path="/esbcontent" source-path="/src" />

The first thing to notice  here is that this is blatently wrong, as it's 
telling the VCF to deploy files in /src to /esbcontent.
If your esb source folder has a file SomeFile.java, it would now be 
published as ESB.esb/esbcontent/SomeFile.java, which is obviously not 
what we want.

But what I would like to see this changed to is

 <wb-resource deploy-path="/" source-path="/build/classes"/>

I want to see if anyone feels one way or the other about this. It would 
make our module factories cleaner and less error prone. Thoughts?