Re: SCA Java EE: WAR contribution processing

[Vamsavardhana Reddy <c1...@gmail.com>]

On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 9:18 PM, Simon Laws <si...@googlemail.com>wrote:

>
>
> On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 1:01 PM, Vamsavardhana Reddy <c1...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> The way a regular SCA contribution jar is processed is that first a
>> PackageProcessor constructs a list of URLs to the artifacts inside the jar,
>> then a URLArtifactProcessor processes the individual URLs in the list and
>> associates a Tuscany model object with the URL.   In case of a WAR file,
>> there will be a single componentType which corresponds to the whole WAR as
>> an artifact and the entire WAR file needs to be processed at once (for e.g.,
>> we are using openejb) to compute the Servlets, EJB references etc. This
>> componentType can not be associated with any single artifact that is inside
>> the WAR file.  Also, an SCA-enhanced WAR file will contain SCA artifacts
>> which may be processed in a similar manner as those contained in a regular
>> SCA contribution.
>>
>> The approach I have in mind is the following:
>> The PackageProcessor for a WAR file will construct the list of URLs to the
>> artifacts inside the WAR file in addition to the WAR file itself being an
>> entry in that list.  (In case of jar files, the PackageProcessor creates a
>> list of URLs to artifacts in the jar only.)  For example, if the WAR file
>> my-web-app.war contains web.xml, web.composite, index.jsp etc., the
>> constructed URLs list will contain "my-web-app.war", "WEB-INF/web.xml",
>> "WEB-INF/web.composite", "index.jsp" etc. Individual implementations can
>> plugin WAR artifact processor to return the remote EJB references, the
>> Servlet, Filter, Listener and JSF POJO classes that need to be processed for
>> SCA annotations. Then the componentType derived from the WAR can be merged
>> with the componentType derived from SCA annotation processing in web
>> artifacts (i.e., the Servlet, Filter, Listener and JSF POJO classes) and the
>> SCA artifacts in the WAR.
>>
>> Any comments, suggestions?
>>
>> ++Vamsi
>>
>>
>>
> Hi Vamsi
>
> I want to make sure I understand your scenarios. Image the following
> directory structure....
>
> mydir /
> A    mySCAContribution
>         myComposite1.composite
>             implementation.ejb ejb-link=""
>             implementation.web web-uri=""
>             implementation.ear archive=""
>          MyComponent1Impl.class
>
> B    myWebAppSCAEnhanced.war
>         index.html
>         my.jsp
>         WEB-INF/
>              web.xml
>              web.composite
>                  implementation.web web-uri=""
>
> C    myEJBSCAEnchanced.jar
>         myBean.class
>        META-INF/
>           ejb-jar.composite
>               implementation.ejb ejb-link=""
>
> D    MyEnterpriseAppSCAEnhanced.ear
>         myWebApp1.war
>         myEJB1.jar
>         META-INF/
>              application.composite
>                 implementation.ejb ejb-link=""
>                 implementation.web web-uri=""
>                 implementation.ear archive=""
>
> E    myWebAppNonSCAEnhanced.war/
>         my.jsp
>
> F    myEJBNonSCAEnchanced.jar
>         myBean.class
>
> G    MyEnterpriseAppNonSCAEnhanced.ear
>         myWebApp1.war
>         myEJB1.jar
>
>
> When you say..
>
> "In case of a WAR file, there will be a single componentType which
> corresponds to the whole WAR as an artifact and the entire WAR file needs to
> be processed at once (for e.g., we are using openejb) to compute the
> Servlets, EJB references etc. This componentType can not be associated with
> any single artifact that is inside the WAR file."
>
> I think you are talking about directory (B) above where the WAR file is a
> contribution. Hence all of the artifacts within must be identified
> independently. Also the composite file within the WAR could use
> implementation.web and this is the other case where you have to establish
> the component type based on the WAR as a whole.
>
> It's not clear to me, given the support we have, if directory (A) which
> references a separate web application, e.g. directory (E) using
> web-uri="../myWebbAppNonSCAEnhanced.was",  does anything sensible.

implementation.web is to be used only inside Java EE contributions.  In this
case, (A) will have to use implementation.jee.


>
>
> Anyhow I see you point. That certainly, in the first case, we have to treat
> a WAR as both a contribution and a contribution artifact. In the directory
> (B) case I follow your logic that we can trap the fact that the war
> contributon could also be treated as an artifact in it's own right. So I
> think you are on the right track.
>
> Does the JEE spec allow for the scenario where the implementation.web that
> is in directory (A) refers to the web app in directory (B) which is SCA
> enhanced itself? In this case we would have to again  do contribution style
> processing on the references webapp. Is the implication here that directory
> (B) must itself have been added as a contribution for this processing to
> complete? TO ask the question another way. If you add a JEE archive with SCA
> enhancement to Geronimo via the SCA plugin does it assume that it's a
> contribution?

The JEE spec does not explicitly say that implementation.web and
implementation.ejb are to be used only in Java EE contributions.  The plugin
does not currently process a Java EE archive as an SCA contribution.  It is
creating a temporary jar which contains specific SCA artifacts from the
original archive and which will be used as a contribution to deploy the SCA
components that model the Java EE components.


>
> I'd like to see a list like this that identifies which of these
> combinations are valid and what is the expected outcome. This is
> suffuciently complex that it is not immediately obvious and so I think being
> explicit will help. Maybe you already have these set up as test cases?
> Anyhow I'm happy to help with this if you are keen.

Thanks Simon. I will create a list of the valid combinations.


>
> Regards
>
> Simon
>



-- 
Vamsi

Re: SCA Java EE: WAR contribution processing

[Simon Laws <si...@googlemail.com>]

Hi Vamsi

I updated the JEE wiki page [1] with a number of different deployment
scenarios. I'm not entirely convinced they are all useful, or even
valid, but I'm just thinking about the various combinations of
enhanced and un-enhanced ears, wars and jars you can have.

Regards

Simon

[1] http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/TUSCANYWIKI/Java+EE+Integration