cocoon-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Harald Entner <Harald.Ent...@workflow.at>
Subject Re: Problem with Springs AnnotationSessionFactoryBean
Date Fri, 26 Sep 2008 09:26:14 GMT
Hello, 

i answer myself, eventually someone will search the list for a similar 
problem. I didn't found a solution to start a block seperately and include 
annotations  when no Servlet-Service is defined. Although, it's possible 
to define a webapp, that includes the necessary artifacts. (similar to the 
webapp in the cocoon distribution) and then startup within the src or 
target directory. Then everything works fine again. 

It's definitely a problem of the rcl-plugin, so the subject of the mail 
was not choosen wisely. 

cheers, 

harald 


<Harald.Entner@workflow.at> wrote on 24.09.2008 16:49:51:

> 
> Hello, 
> 
> i'm facing a problem when using cocoon 2.2, the rcl plugin and 
> AnnotationSessionFactoryBean. (spring) 
> 
> we have the following infrastructure (simple view): 
> 
> -> core 
> -> a list of seperate projects. (blocks) 
> 
> The tables that belong to annotated classes placed in the core are 
> generated when running the core itself, but are not generated for 
> annotated classes placed in one of the seperate projects. (The 
> problem only occurs when one of these  blocks starts up seperately 
> (using the rcl plugin). 
> 
> We have only one Servlet-service, so 
> 
> # at.workflow.webdesk.webdesk-core.service%classes-dir=./target/classes 
> 
> in the rcl.properties is outcommented. (obviously not for the core).
> So we had to add the target/classes directory to the classpath of 
> the run:jetty:run plugin. 
> 
> Jetty itself starts up fine and after adding the classes directory 
> of the target dir to the classpath of the run-jetty-run plugin, the 
> classes (of the seperate project) are found and passed to the 
> AnnotationSessionFactoryBean. (but the tables are not generated - 
> which is strange somehow) 
> 
> When the jar is deployed to a webserver everything works fine again,
> but the possibility to run a block on its own is a great benefit 
> that we don't want to miss. 
> 
> Has anybody experience in this area? Or had eventually the same problem? 

> 
> regards, 
> 
> Harald 
Mime
View raw message