[jbosstools-dev] New server profiles vs. Runtime Detection

[Martin Malina]

On 26. 3. 2014, at 18:56, Max Rydahl Andersen <manderse at redhat.com> wrote:

> On 26 Mar 2014, at 17:37, Len DiMaggio wrote:
> 
>> Why not provide both options?
> 
> which two options are you referring to ?

I think Len refers to this snippet from my email:
"So perhaps we should consider which one should be used for runtime detection in the future. Or even better perhaps to offer both options for runtime detection?"

So once runtime detection finds the servers, you could choose which mode to use before clicking OK to add them. But I’m not sure if there’s a way to do it and avoid confusion for the user.

-Martin

> I think the idea about locking the servers deployment mode
> is too strict in context runtime detection.
> 
> We need some way to change these - either allow same flexibility as
> before or have a "Recreate this server using same basic info but in Profile X" instead.
> 
> /max
> 
>> 
>> -- Len
>> 
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> 
>> | From: "Max Rydahl Andersen" <manderse at redhat.com>
>> | To: "Martin Malina" <mmalina at redhat.com>
>> | Cc: "Rob Stryker" <rstryker at redhat.com>, "jbosstools-dev at lists.jboss.org
>> | jbosstools-dev" <jbosstools-dev at lists.jboss.org>
>> | Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2014 10:32:36 AM
>> | Subject: Re: [jbosstools-dev] New server profiles vs. Runtime Detection
>> 
>> | I noticed this discrepancy too. Agree need to figure this workflow out.
>> 
>> | /max (sent from my phone)
>> 
>> | On 26/03/2014, at 12.03, Martin Malina < mmalina at redhat.com > wrote:
>> 
>> | | Hi Rob,
>> |
>> 
>> | | I have a question. Now that we have more profiles for servers ( JBIDE-16721
>> | | )
>> | | - one that prefers management operations and one that does not - what
>> | | happens when you add a server using Runtime Detection? I think it will
>> | | currently use the non-management option. In the past, you could change the
>> | | server settings later to use management. But you say that increasingly
>> | | there
>> | | will be differences between the two that can’t be changed afterwards - one
>> | | example is the deployment tab in the server editor.
>> |
>> | | So perhaps we should consider which one should be used for runtime
>> | | detection
>> | | in the future. Or even better perhaps to offer both options for runtime
>> | | detection?
>> |
>> | | What do you think about this?
>> |
>> 
>> | | Thanks,
>> |
>> | | Martin
>> |
>> 
>> | | --
>> |
>> | | Martin Malina
>> |
>> | | JBoss QA Engineer
>> |
>> | | Red Hat Czech s.r.o.
>> |
>> | | Purkynova 99
>> |
>> | | 612 45 Brno, Czech Republic
>> |
>> 
>> | | Tel.: +420 532 294 265
>> |
>> 
>> | | _______________________________________________
>> |
>> | | jbosstools-dev mailing list
>> |
>> | | jbosstools-dev at lists.jboss.org
>> |
>> | | https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbosstools-dev
>> |
>> 
>> | _______________________________________________
>> | jbosstools-dev mailing list
>> | jbosstools-dev at lists.jboss.org
>> | https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbosstools-dev
>> -- 
>> 
>> Len DiMaggio (ldimaggi at redhat.com)
>> JBoss by Red Hat
>> 314 Littleton Road
>> Westford, MA 01886 USA
>> tel: 978.392.3179
>> cell: 781.472.9912
>> http://www.redhat.com
>> http://community.jboss.org/people/ldimaggio
> 
> 
> /max
> http://about.me/maxandersen

--
Martin Malina
JBoss QA Engineer
Red Hat Czech s.r.o.
Purkynova 99
612 45 Brno, Czech Republic

Tel.: +420 532 294 265




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/jbosstools-dev/attachments/20140326/400543b2/attachment.html