geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dain Sundstrom <d...@iq80.com>
Subject Re: Quick Jetty/Tomcat configuration idea
Date Tue, 28 Jun 2005 00:02:48 GMT
I definitely like the idea of being able easily include another file,  
and prefer xml includes.  Aaron has a good point about the problems.   
Maybe we can do the include thing, and then on the client side of the  
deploy tool, read the xml document into a DOM, which could cause all  
of the includes to resolve.  Then we can just write the integrated  
xml over the wire to the deployment server.

-dain

On Jun 26, 2005, at 10:28 PM, Aaron Mulder wrote:

> On Tue, 14 Jun 2005, Jeff Genender wrote:
>
>> I was talking with Bruce about making the Jetty/Tomcat choice a  
>> simple
>> comment and uncomment task and we came up with a possible idea and  
>> wanted to
>> run this by people.
>>
>> Can the plan parsers support the <!ENTITY> to be used as an include?
>> Example:
>>
>> <!ENTITY jetty SYSTEM "includes/jetty.xml">
>>
>
>     I like the idea of splitting out the Tomcat and Jetty information.
> I'm not sure how well the deployer will handle it if you give it an  
> XML
> file as a deployment plan argument and that XML file imports or  
> includes
> other XML files.  Certainly JSR-88 only lets you specify a single
> "deployment plan" file, which is why we need to be able to put all an
> EAR's modules' deployment information into a single file -- so remote
> deployment would undoubtedly not work this way (though this only  
> matters
> if you're trying to redeploy your J2EE server configuration remotely,
> which would be a little odd).
>
>     In any case, it might be more workable if part of the build
> process did some kind of file merging.  We already run velocity on the
> plans -- I bet there's some way to have velocity insert either
> "jetty-content.xml" or "tomcat-content.xml" into "j2ee-server- 
> plan.xml" at
> about the same time we substitute version numbers and things.  Then  
> if all
> goes well, you could just do something like "maven - 
> Dweb.container=tomcat"
> or whatever, and it would produce a formatted server plan with the
> appropriate web container content.
>
> Aaron
>
>
>> I am sure you can start to see the idea? The idea is to remove all
>> references to Jetty in the j2ee-server-plan.xml, and allow it to  
>> "include"
>> the proper configuration.  We can do this for the deployer and
>> runtime-deployer plans as well.  This way we only need to comment/ 
>> uncomment
>> just a couple of places.
>>
>> Is this something that is doable?  Thoughts?
>>
>> Jeff
>>
>>
>>
>


Mime
View raw message