cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alex Huang <Alex.Hu...@citrix.com>
Subject RE: [DISCUSS] Java 7, tomcat 7 and further upgrades
Date Wed, 18 Sep 2013 16:29:41 GMT
I don't have much problem with switching to jdk1.7.  My eclipse is running with jdk1.7 as the
builder and it can't find any problems in cs code.  The main question I think will come from
the Linux variants.  Are all of them shipping with jdk1.7 now?

--Alex

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Trippie [mailto:trippie@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Hugo Trippaers
> Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2013 5:10 AM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Java 7, tomcat 7 and further upgrades
> 
> Hey all,
> 
> Sorry for the threadomancy, but the discussion have become relevant again
> with the current issues with the libvirt library. Of course this could also be
> solved by updating the libvirt library with a jdk6 version. Still it might be good
> to revisit this topic.
> 
> It appears not to be possible to switch code style to 1.7 and produce a 1.6
> compatible binary. I remember this working with olders versions, but didn't
> dig to much into this.
> 
> So the new question in this thread will be, should we switch CloudStack to
> jdk 1.7?
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Hugo
> 
> On Jul 1, 2013, at 12:45 AM, Prasanna Santhanam <tsp@apache.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 04:18:40PM -0400, John Burwell wrote:
> >> All,
> >>
> >> I am +1 for Java7.  However, I would like to propose ridding
> >> ourselves of Tomcat entirely and embedding a network stack such as
> >> Netty (http://netty.io) with a servlet bridge.  We have one JSP in
> >> the system that generates JSON resources.  It could be easily
> >> eliminated with a simple servlet that generates JSON from a
> >> ResourceBundle.  Outside of this JSP. I don't see any other
> >> requirements for a JEE container besides hosting a servlet.  We would
> >> gain a far simpler, self-contained deployment model (a single jar).
> >> Additionally, we would gain greater control of the startup and
> >> shutdown lifecycle, as well as, threading dynamics.  If there is
> >> interest in this approach, I have thoughts on how to achieve this
> >> embedding and create a lightweight daemon framework that could be
> >> used for all CloudStack daemons.
> >>
> >> As an aside, I also think we should replace our hand-rolled NIO code
> >> with Netty as well.
> >>
> >
> > John - could you break this and other thoughts down a little more in
> > what's involved?  Perhaps into its own thread. I don't know Netty. And
> > my J2EE is shaky at best.
> >
> > It's been a previous wish on this list to have the packaging of
> > cloudstack into a single easily deployable war instead of all the
> > complicated packaging we do. So I'd like to hear more of that and
> > other issues you describe.
> >
> > --
> > Prasanna.,
> >
> > ------------------------
> > Powered by BigRock.com
> >


Mime
View raw message