geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dain Sundstrom <dsundst...@gluecode.com>
Subject Re: Tomcat Module Still Broken
Date Tue, 07 Dec 2004 22:08:15 GMT
On Dec 7, 2004, at 1:05 PM, Jacek Laskowski wrote:

> Dain Sundstrom wrote:
>> Currently there is only one deployer slot available for each module  
>> type of an EAR.  The following snippit from the  shows the EAR 
>> deployer  configuration
>> <gbean  
>> name="geronimo.deployer:role=Builder,type=EAR,config=org/apache/ 
>> geronimo/J2EEDeployer"
>>         class="org.apache.geronimo.j2ee.deployment.EARConfigBuilder">
>>     <reference name="EJBConfigBuilder">some:object=name</reference>
>>     <reference name="WebConfigBuilder">some:object=name</reference>
>>     <reference  
>> name="ConnectorConfigBuilder">some:object=name</reference>
>>     <reference  
>> name="AppClientConfigBuilder">some:object=name</reference>
>> </gbean>
>> I strongly suggest that we only run one servlet engine in Geronimo.   
>> Both Tomcat and Jetty are pretty large, so I think we should have  
>> separate distributions for them.  Of course this would be easier if I 
>>  had moved assembly last weekend.
>
> It means that I can't deploy a module to both containers and run only 
> one, doesn't it? If so, a user has to decide ahead if (s)he wants to 
> run tomcat or jetty, before deployment takes place, right? I've 
> noticed that the order of deployer entries in the j2ee-deployer plan 
> does matter, i.e. when there're two web deployers defined in the plan, 
> the later wins. Is it always true? Do you know about a solution to not 
> force a user to comment or uncomment a gbean configuration for a web 
> builder?

No.

I know that running two web servers seems cool, but would any (sane) 
user actually need (not want) to do this?  I feel that a reasonable 
solution is to have separate distributions for tomcat and jetty.

-dain


Mime
View raw message