[WFLY-19130] Publish Wildfly channels #561
Conversation
spyrkob
force-pushed
the
WFLY-19130
branch
2 times, most recently
from
f4d0316 to
6868a2c
Compare
| |wildfly-ee-galleon-pack and its dependencies | ||
| | - | ||
|
|
||
| |`org.wildfly.channels:wildfly` |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm wondering if a better name would be something like org.wildfly.channels:wildfly-full
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That would be a bummer.
If you to provision what almost everyone regards as WildFly you use the 'wildfly' feature pack. Adding "full" is confusing.
The channels are a bit different from the feature packs though; using the 'wildfly' FP means you unavoidably get 'wildfly-ee' with no need for the user to even be aware that's happened.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's mostly for consistency - the other two channels have a name of wildfly-*, so it feels like channel name wildfly misses something :)
On the other hand, like you said, wildfly is consistent with naming of the feature packs.
|
@bstansberry do we want to think about adding the provisioning metadata to the WildFly zip we distribute? Adding |
|
@spyrkob I've approved this as I think it's fine for WF 32 Beta. Re adding more metadata to the standard zips, what would that require in terms of build process? We provide a .galleon/provisioning.xml, but just an empty .installation dir. Adding more makes sense and is something we can add into this analysis for 32 Final, if the mechanics involved in producing it work out. |
|
@jamezp As a member of the feature team are you able to review / approve this one please? |
Issue: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/WFLY-19130