db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Andrew McIntyre" <mcintyr...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Re: [Vote] Include tomcat5.exe as derby.exe (Re: [jira] Commented: (DERBY-187) Starting derby network server as a service in Win OS)
Date Thu, 19 Oct 2006 04:38:21 GMT
On 10/18/06, Bryan Pendleton <bpendleton@amberpoint.com> wrote:
> > Now I'm thinking to include tomcat5.exe into derby as derby.exe as
> > resolution for DERBY-187.
> Are the following two statements true?
> 1) This derby.exe program would be useful to Windows users, not to other users

Correct, since tomcat5.exe is just a renamed procrun/prunsrv from the
Jakarta Commons Daemon project.

> 2) This derby.exe program can be used with any release of Derby (that is, we
> don't have to modify the NetworkServerControl class to enable it to be run as
> a service by Derby.exe).

Procrun/prunsrv can be used to interface any program, not just java,
with Windows' services. Consider it an Apache licensed srvany.exe.

The question that I think needs to be asked is:

3) Why can't users get a native Windows binary for procrun from the
Jakarta Commons Daemon project that they can use with Derby?

There's even a JIRA that's over a year old (migrated from Bugzilla)
with no comments that asks for exactly that:


> If both the above statements are true, then it occurs to me that it might be
> nice to be able to distribute this new program separately, rather than as
> part of the basic Derby release.

While I don't see any problem with Derby redistributing procrun, I
don't think we necessarily need to be redistributing it either. It
would be sufficient to provide a pointer to the commons daemon project
and instructions in our documentation for those that want this

But, since you can't actually get procrun as a Windows executable
anywhere that I could find from the links at
http://jakarta.apache.org/commons/daemon/index.html, I suppose
redistributing it is probably the best way of providing this
functionality for users.

Maybe there's some reason why they don't redistribute their own code
in binary form? I find it sort of odd, but I haven't gone to look for
the reasons yet.

> That way users could decide whether or not to download this program, and we
> also could release this program independently of releasing the basic Derby
> software.

If it were possible to download procrun as a binary from the Commons
Daemon project, I would prefer that users pick it up from there, and
we could provide Derby-specific instructions on using it with the
network server.

Since that doesn't seem to be possible, I think it's reasonable to
consider redistributing it ourselves and having a vote on that.
DERBY-187 is the 8th most popular issue in our JIRA, tied with full
text search, so that indicates demand for the feature.

I will vote on this later. I want to do some more research into
procrun and think about how it might fit into the Derby -bin


View raw message