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

[Max Rydahl Andersen]

On Tue, Apr 02, 2013 at 10:48:05AM -0300, Rafael Benevides wrote:
>>>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".

frameworks or should we even add some more specific type i.e. drools-fwk, seam-fwk ? Or is there some other way we can know what specific type they are ?

>>>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.

great.