Hi Mike,
I tend to agree that these are separate concerns, and I agree that
it doesn't necessarily change the sequence-of-deploying problem. I
only mentioned the point because I thought you might consider the
workflow around how definitions.xml gets used as different from the
workflow around that of deploying composites.
In my view, it probably changes the magnitude of the problem, but
not the existence.
-Eric.
On 2/23/11 3:48 AM, Mike Edwards wrote:
OF36C68208.CF314DBC-ON80257840.003FD8E6-80257840.00402665@uk.ibm.com"
type="cite">
Eric,
I think that the issue contained
in
ASSEMBLY-257 is pretty well orthogonal to the discussion of
ASSEMBLY-253.
Whether the channel definition is
in
a composite file or is contained within a definitions.xml file
does not
change the
potential for the channel to be
in a
separate contribution from some or all of its "using" producers
and consumers.
It is this which leads to the
sequence
question and the problem with auto-deploy.
Yours, Mike
|
|
Dr
Mike Edwards
|
Mail Point
146, Hursley
Park
|
|
STSM
|
Winchester,
Hants SO21
2JN
|
SCA
& Services
Standards
|
United
Kingdom
|
Co-Chair
OASIS SCA
Assembly TC
|
|
|
IBM
Software Group
|
|
|
Phone:
|
+44-1962
818014
|
|
|
Mobile:
|
+44-7802-467431
(274097)
|
|
|
e-mail:
|
mike_edwards@uk.ibm.com
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Mike,
On 2/18/11 11:06 AM, Danny van der Rijn wrote:
<vdR2>
I agree that mechanically there is little difference between an
unsatisfied
reference and an unsatisfied GDC. Semantically, however, there
is
quite a difference. In order to mechanically satisfy the
unsatisfied
GDC (albeit minimally) all that is required is a name, and the
name is
known exactly by the unsatisfied use of the GDC. Therefore the
runtime
already has enough information to head off the error. Not so in
the
case of an unsatisfied reference.
</vdR2>
<mje>
Thank you for putting it so clearly.
My concerns with auto-creation surround this possibility of
deployment
taking place as a series of steps, rather than as a "single
big bang"
- and with the question of what happens at the completion of
each step.
I am concerned with the case where the Domain level channel is
there *somewhere*
in the deployed contributions but where it has not yet been
deployed. Allowing
auto-creation in these circumstances is problematic, if
auto-creation occurs
before the deployment of the Domain level channel.
</mje>
At least for this point, this is one of the reasons
that
I filed
http://osoa.org/jira/browse/ASSEMBLY-257
If this matters to you, perhaps we should address the question
of how they're
deployed before worrying about whether they can be
auto-deployed?
-Eric.
Unless stated otherwise
above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales
with number
741598.
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth,
Hampshire PO6
3AU
|