Mailing-List: contact dev-help@geronimo.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@geronimo.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (hermes.apache.org: local policy)
Message-ID: <41B7A15E.80108@spikesource.com>
Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 16:50:38 -0800
From: Sastry Malladi <smalladi@spikesource.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.4.2) Gecko/20040301
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: dev@geronimo.apache.org
Subject: Re: Tomcat Module Still Broken
References: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0412051310210.19781@saturn.opentools.org>
 <41B47427.4060402@apache.org>
 <Pine.LNX.4.58.0412061019160.3785@saturn.opentools.org>
 <41B478E4.1050009@apache.org>
 <Pine.LNX.4.58.0412061055560.3785@saturn.opentools.org>
 <6205DEE2-47A5-11D9-895C-000D93C5B79C@gluecode.com>
 <41B61B36.9000202@apache.org>
 <7E112151-489C-11D9-895C-000D93C5B79C@gluecode.com>
 <fcce2473041207160078b360f4@mail.gmail.com>
 <3E724F90-48B5-11D9-895C-000D93C5B79C@gluecode.com>
 <41B6B724.5000001@apache.org>
 <D357DFC7-4938-11D9-895C-000D93C5B79C@gluecode.com>
In-Reply-To: <D357DFC7-4938-11D9-895C-000D93C5B79C@gluecode.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Dain Sundstrom wrote:

> On Dec 8, 2004, at 12:11 AM, Jacek Laskowski wrote:
>
>> Dain Sundstrom wrote:
>>
>>> The problem is tomcat and jetty have fundamentally different designs 
>>> and architectures, so any abstraction would limit both.  The nice 
>>> thing about the gbean architecture is it was designed to allows 
>>> components to not agree on a common design.
>>> Regardless of this discussion, I don't think we want to ship two 
>>> huge web servers in the geronimo distribution.  My guess is this 
>>> will add at least 15 megs to the distribution.
>>
>>
>> I absolutely agree. I think the problem would go away if Geronimo had 
>> the possibility to download its configuration and wire it in 
>> dynamicaly. I think, it's Jeremy's idea. So, people would decide 
>> which configuration they need and Geronimo would download it 
>> afterwards. It's similar in concept to the way maven dependencies work.
>>
>> Dain, do you think, it'd sort it out once and for all?
>
>
> I think that is a separate issue although and it is a important one.  
> I'm getting at what people get out of the box.  I expect us to produce 
> at least 3 distributions, a server with Jetty, a server with Tomcat, 
> and a minimal empty server.  The last option would be a server 
> containing almost nothing, and all major services would be downloaded. 

I apologize for jumping in the middle.
It makes sense to have several different configurations and 
corresponding distributions, rather than bundling everything together.  
As long as there is a simple and easy way to "drop in (i.e replace)" a 
different servlet container,  with everything else in-tact, that is 
sufficient, in my opinion. It will also be
useful to have 2 or 3 pre-baked configurations (e.g a light weight 
container ( servelets/jsp, JNDI,  JDBC, JAAS and JACC),  container with 
just the standard J2EE components,  container with additional features 
like(some of these may not have been currently planned) High 
availability/clustering, resource management, auto-provisioning of 
servers/nodes based on demand etc.)

>
>
> -dain
>