[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [virgo-dev] A home for Bundlor

Hey!

Just a few thoughts from my side:

In my dreams, the Virgo IDE server adaptor would be able to deploy:
- PDE projects
- Bundlor projects
- bndtools projects
- WAR/Web projects
- PAR projects
- plans?

To me this doesn't sound like PDE is the common piece that once we have it will enable us to do all the other things as well.

I would prefer to decouple the discussion around the home of the Bundlor project from the deployment features of the Virgo IDE or the Virgo server adaptor (which might become part of Libra one day).

Therefore I could imagine having something like an extension point for those deployment scenarios (a "deployer" extension point maybe), where the server adapter is using the "deployer extensions" to deploy different kind of projects. Then we could implement, step by step, extensions for those different kind of projects. Its just a rough idea, but I would be happy to hear your opinions... :-)

When we decide to let the Bundlor tooling become part of PDE (or an extension to PDE), we would just need to modify the deployer extensions for those two projects (or just eliminate the bundlor specific one). When we decide that Bundlor is not becoming part of PDE, then we just keep those two extensions.

What do you think?

Cheers,
-Martin




On 27.01.12 21:43, Miles Parker wrote:

Yeah, that would be a problem, wouldn't it. :) TO be clear, I meant "if Virgo *IDE* only supported.." I think what I'm asking is that if Libra tools are capable of packaging up WAR and web projects as PDE projects (still not clear on whether that is true) and Virgo IDE could manage those, then you would have a single PDE deployment scenario.

The reason that I'm asking all of these questions is that I'm trying to think through the implications of having many to many relationships between the development environment and the deployment environment. If you were able to have a common interchange mechanism it seems that it could simplify a lot of things, as you would only have to maintain a) something to get all development artifacts treated as PDE, and b) something to manage the deployment of those artifacts so they end up on the Virgo server as expected. I'm not saying this is a *good* idea or one that should even be seriously considered, but I'm trying to wrap my head around whether it is even possible.

Also to be clear, I'm only talking about bundles / plugin projects, i.e. actual components needed to support clients post-deployment. So AFA plans go, that would be handled by unique tooling. There is a bug open on that.


On Jan 27, 2012, at 12:26 PM, Christian Dupuis wrote:

OK, so it sounds like PDE is the common denominator, which was sort
of my expectation / hope. I think the important question to ask at
this point is the reverse; if Virgo *only* spoke PDE, what
implications would that have for users? Are there scenarios that we
couldn't support -- even with the Libra adapters -- given that?

You wouldn't be able to deploy WAR projects, plans or web modules.

Christian

--
Christian Dupuis, Director, R&D
SpringSource, a division of VMware
www.springsource.com - cdupuis@xxxxxxxxxx - @cdupuis



cheers,


Miles









Greetings,
Kaloyan



From: Miles Parker [mailto:miles.parker@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: 20 ÑÐÑÐÑÐ 2012 Ð. 20:48 Ñ.
To: Glyn Normington
Cc: Raev, Kaloyan; Martin Lippert; Leo Dos Santos;
libra-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx ; virgo-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx ; pde-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: A home for Bundlor




On Jan 20, 2012, at 1:43 AM, Glyn Normington wrote:






On 20 Jan 2012, at 02:10, Miles Parker wrote:



the larger Spring donation which has also spawned Libra etc..


For the record, let's be clear that SAP donated Libra and then factored some of the SpringSource donated Virgo IDE into Libra.


Thanks Glyn, my mistake. I'm still not familiar with all of the history here.







Do you agree that a Proof-of-Concept showing how Bundlor can be
integrated with PDE is a good first step? If we see that this is
possible (and also how it is possible), will open the door for many
improvements like https://bugs.eclipse.org/329198 you have
mentioned.




Yes to the first question. I'm not sure it's related to the second bug.



In the first case we're asking "would Bundlor be useful to general
PDE projects, and if so would that usefulness outweigh potential
loss of transparency, maintenance costs and so on". As POC would be
like, "support creating of generic PDE projects that make use of the
bundlor mechanism". I think that PDE is best qualified to give an
answer to that one. Is there anyone from PDE who has thoughts to
share on that?



In the second we're really asking "given a PDE project, can we make
it more easy to build, execute and run with Virgo and other
[non-Eclipse SDK] Runtime environments by leveraging PDE tools?" I
think the Libra and Virgo teams will have to answer that one. Note
by the way that it is perfectly easy at this point to actually
deploy PDE built bundles, you just have to do the extra steps of
exporting or building the plugins manually and then copying them off
to Virgo runtime. So I think this part is largely a matter of some
automation. But there are much more complex scenarios, where for
example we might want to use the Run Configuration stuff as the
primary gateway into launching and testing for self-hosted Virgo and
Libra targets, rather or in addition to the current approach of
manually creating local server(s) instances for that.



-Miles

_______________________________________________
virgo-dev mailing list
virgo-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/virgo-dev

_______________________________________________
virgo-dev mailing list
virgo-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/virgo-dev

_______________________________________________ virgo-dev mailing list virgo-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/virgo-dev