[chef] Re: Re: Re: Re: rewriting my tomcat LWRP, how best to group options?

[Bryan Berry < >]

i agree w/ Andrea that we should start w/ a simpler JVM base class or
module that can be extended or mixed in

something like Chef::Resource::Jvm

I think creating a generic jee_container will be too much to bite off

I maintain both tomcat and jboss cookbooks and I don't think I could
make a jee_container class that could accommodate both.

On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 3:17 PM, Andrea Campi
<
 >
 wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 2:59 PM, Edward Sargisson 
> <
 >
>  wrote:
>> So maybe there's an idea of a "jee_container" cookbook to represent Tomcat,
>> JBoss, WAS, Jetty, etc.
>>
>> The setup would go something like:
>> application (WAR location, datasources, JMS, mail, etc. Results in the WAR
>> being download and deployed, a context.xml written and external properties
>> file and log properties file written into place from template)
>> jee_container (has a LWRP/recipe for each supported container, JVM 
>> settings,
>> JMX settings, etc)
>
> Not sure a jee_container cookbook is needed, but indeed the java
> cookbook could come with an "abstract" LWRP that the "concrete" LWRPs
> (Tomcat and so on) could inherit from / mix in.
> This would prevent an endless duplication of pretty much the same
> stuff all over the place.
>
> Frankly, it looks to me that trying to design a complete solution for
> *everything* would be really hard and time-consuming. I'd rather work
> in "agile" way and start with just a couple of stacks; then factor out
> commonalities and build from there.
> Tomcat is the prime candidate since that's what the "legacy"
> application cookbook had; Glassfish may as well be a second example.
>
> Andrea