You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to user@geronimo.apache.org by Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com> on 2008/04/17 19:10:38 UTC
Remote deployment using --inPlace option
Hi,
Something was unclear to me. It seems that the remote deployment using the --inPlace option (for a totally exploded EAR with
exploded and only exploded WARs inside) is only possible if you replicate the deployed directory structure on both the client and
the server machine. Am I right or am I missing something ?
Thanks
Jacques
Re: Remote deployment using --inPlace option
Posted by Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com>.
Hi David,
From: "David Jencks" <da...@yahoo.com>
>
> On Apr 17, 2008, at 10:10 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Something was unclear to me. It seems that the remote deployment
>> using the --inPlace option (for a totally exploded EAR with
>> exploded and only exploded WARs inside) is only possible if you
>> replicate the deployed directory structure on both the client and
>> the server machine. Am I right or am I missing something ?
>
> You are right. I guess we might try harder to disable any pretense
> of --inPlace working with remote deployment.
Yes the documentation is a bit sparse about this issue. Anyway, I can confirm it works using such replication (with exacly same
path on both machines).
Thanks for support
Jacques
> thanks
> david jencks
>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Jacques
>
Re: Remote deployment using --inPlace option
Posted by Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com>.
From: "David Jencks" <da...@yahoo.com>
>
> On Apr 17, 2008, at 11:39 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>
>>> Hi David,
>>>
>>>> On Apr 17, 2008, at 10:10 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> Something was unclear to me. It seems that the remote
>>>>> deployment using the --inPlace option (for a totally exploded
>>>>> EAR with exploded and only exploded WARs inside) is only
>>>>> possible if you replicate the deployed directory structure on
>>>>> both the client and the server machine. Am I right or am I
>>>>> missing something ?
>>>>
>>>> You are right. I guess we might try harder to disable any
>>>> pretense of --inPlace working with remote deployment.
>>>
>>> Yes the documentation is a bit sparse about this issues. Anyway, I
>>> can confirm it works using such replication (with exactly same
>>> path on both machines).
>>
>> By the way, do you want that I open a Jira issue for that ?
>
> That would be great. I'm not sure we'll do much about it soon, but
> it's good to have on record.
Done : https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-3963
Jacques
> thanks
> david jencks
>
>>
>>> Thanks for support
>>>
>>> Jacques
>>>
>>>> thanks
>>>> david jencks
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>
>>>>> Jacques
>>>>
>>
>
Re: Remote deployment using --inPlace option
Posted by David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com>.
On Apr 17, 2008, at 11:39 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>> Hi David,
>>
>>> On Apr 17, 2008, at 10:10 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Something was unclear to me. It seems that the remote
>>>> deployment using the --inPlace option (for a totally exploded
>>>> EAR with exploded and only exploded WARs inside) is only
>>>> possible if you replicate the deployed directory structure on
>>>> both the client and the server machine. Am I right or am I
>>>> missing something ?
>>>
>>> You are right. I guess we might try harder to disable any
>>> pretense of --inPlace working with remote deployment.
>>
>> Yes the documentation is a bit sparse about this issues. Anyway, I
>> can confirm it works using such replication (with exactly same
>> path on both machines).
>
> By the way, do you want that I open a Jira issue for that ?
That would be great. I'm not sure we'll do much about it soon, but
it's good to have on record.
thanks
david jencks
>
>> Thanks for support
>>
>> Jacques
>>
>>> thanks
>>> david jencks
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>>
>>>> Jacques
>>>
>
Re: Remote deployment using --inPlace option
Posted by Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com>.
> Hi David,
>
>> On Apr 17, 2008, at 10:10 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Something was unclear to me. It seems that the remote deployment using the --inPlace option (for a totally exploded EAR with
>>> exploded and only exploded WARs inside) is only possible if you replicate the deployed directory structure on both the client
>>> and the server machine. Am I right or am I missing something ?
>>
>> You are right. I guess we might try harder to disable any pretense of --inPlace working with remote deployment.
>
> Yes the documentation is a bit sparse about this issues. Anyway, I can confirm it works using such replication (with exactly same
> path on both machines).
By the way, do you want that I open a Jira issue for that ?
> Thanks for support
>
> Jacques
>
>> thanks
>> david jencks
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> Jacques
>>
>
Re: Remote deployment using --inPlace option
Posted by Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com>.
Hi David,
> On Apr 17, 2008, at 10:10 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Something was unclear to me. It seems that the remote deployment using the --inPlace option (for a totally exploded EAR with
>> exploded and only exploded WARs inside) is only possible if you replicate the deployed directory structure on both the client
>> and the server machine. Am I right or am I missing something ?
>
> You are right. I guess we might try harder to disable any pretense of --inPlace working with remote deployment.
Yes the documentation is a bit sparse about this issues. Anyway, I can confirm it works using such replication (with exacly same
path on both machines).
Thanks for support
Jacques
> thanks
> david jencks
>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Jacques
>
Re: Remote deployment using --inPlace option
Posted by David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com>.
On Apr 17, 2008, at 10:10 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Something was unclear to me. It seems that the remote deployment
> using the --inPlace option (for a totally exploded EAR with
> exploded and only exploded WARs inside) is only possible if you
> replicate the deployed directory structure on both the client and
> the server machine. Am I right or am I missing something ?
You are right. I guess we might try harder to disable any pretense
of --inPlace working with remote deployment.
thanks
david jencks
>
> Thanks
>
> Jacques