Re: Microservice packaging.

[James Bognar <ja...@apache.org>]

Sorry Peter....I forgot to reply to this!

You're correct in your assessment.  You're not suggesting enforcement of
any packaging....just adding a convenient way of packaging it one way.  I
think it's a really good idea.  You should go ahead and add the code.

James.

On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 3:11 PM, Peter Haumer <ph...@us.ibm.com> wrote:

> Hello.
> I was on vacation and could not work on it before I left. What is the
> conclusion then? (there were many emails afterwards, so I might have missed
> it)
>
> I was not thinking of any "enforcement" either, but just the simplest way
> to package it one way out of the box. In the end it is people's code, the
> pom shows and kind of docs the dependencies, but they can package however
> they want. However, as users most likely have Maven already to build Juneau
> or load it as a dependency, using Maven to package it as a simple uber-jar
> that can be started via command line for quick testing seems straight
> forward and we would not have to maintain a much more complex ant file. The
> other problem I want to solve is that the template is currently not
> included in the distribution. The Javadoc mentions a dead download link.
> So, I want to include it into the source and bin release zips, so that
> people can use it as a starting point. Again, they do not have to use the
> template, but it would really convenient if they use Maven.
>
>
> Thanks and best regards,
> Peter Haumer.
> ______________________________________________________________
>
> [image: Inactive hide details for James Bognar ---06/14/2017 07:41:10
> AM---I agree. We shouldn't enforce packaging. Today, it has 1 pa]James
> Bognar ---06/14/2017 07:41:10 AM---I agree. We shouldn't enforce packaging.
> Today, it has 1 packaging requirement: That the config fi
>
> From: James Bognar <ja...@salesforce.com>
> To: dev@juneau.incubator.apache.org
> Date: 06/14/2017 07:41 AM
> Subject: Re: Microservice packaging.
> ------------------------------
>
>
>
> I agree.  We shouldn't enforce packaging.
>
> Today, it has 1 packaging requirement:  That the config file be co-located
> with the jar, or that the config file location be passed in as a parameter.
>
>
> > The core libraries should just provide how to run
> > an application, not its deployment methodology.  If we can just publish
> the
> > JAR and provide instructions on how to package it that would make more
> > sense.
>
> That's pretty much what the template project is.  The juneau-all jar
> provides all the infrastructure.  The template project provides you with a
> default POM and Hello World resource to make it easy to create your own
> microservice.  The default POM in this project would define a target for
> building your microservice as an uber-jar, but you can package it any way
> you like.  We should probably provide instructions as packaging it as 1) an
> uber-jar, 2) a war, 3) other?
>
> I'm not familiar with Capsule....so maybe?  The RestMicroservice class is a
> main class that can be invoked directly.  We do that in the unit tests.  It
> just needs the config file location to be specified.
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 10:22 AM, John D. Ament <jo...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > I've always been of the mindset that microservices shouldn't enforce
> > packaging requirements.  The core libraries should just provide how to
> run
> > an application, not its deployment methodology.  If we can just publish
> the
> > JAR and provide instructions on how to package it that would make more
> > sense.
> >
> > E.g. can I use Juneau Microservices with Capsule?
> >
> > John
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 9:14 AM James Bognar <ja...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Peter has expressed interest in updating the microservice-template
> > project
> > > to include changes to the POM to allow you to generate uber-jars using
> > the
> > > Maven Shade plugin for easy startup....
> > >
> > > java -jar juneau-microservice-template-1.0.0.jar microservice.cfg
> > >
> > > The current build.xml file used to be able to create uber-jars but is
> > > out-of-date.  If you wanted to include 3rd-party libraries, you had to
> > copy
> > > them into your project lib directory and then they would be included in
> > the
> > > final jar.  I like this idea of a pure Maven-based solution for
> > uber-jars.
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> James Bognar
>
>
>
>