geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Aaron Mulder (JIRA)" <...@geronimo.apache.org>
Subject [jira] Updated: (GERONIMO-763) M4: Provide identical Jetty/Tomcat assembly alternatives
Date Fri, 15 Jul 2005 19:43:27 GMT
     [ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-763?page=all ]

Aaron Mulder updated GERONIMO-763:
----------------------------------

    Description: 
The feeling on the mailing list was that the M4 release should offer separate Tomcat and Jetty
builds.  If that is to be done, I think we essentially want two versions of the J2EE server
plan that are otherwise identical, or one with two different possible imports for the web
container, or whatever.  With the current plans it appears that your options are Jetty or
Jetty+Tomcat, not Tomcat alone (at least, not without manual editing).  After installation,
I think we want the org/apache/geronimo/Server configuration to have either Tomcat or Jetty
but not both (and no separate org/apache/geronimo/Tomcat configuration).

Note that it should be quite easy to build two separate installer packages based on this,
and it may be possible to build one installer that includes one app server by default but
allows you to override it with the other.  I'm not sure it will be as easy to have two separate
assembly output directories; perhaps the server selected for the assembly module should be
controlled by a property in assembly/project.properties

It would probably be best for this ultimately to migrate to HEAD, but it's urgent that we
have it in the M4 branch (based on the apparent concensus)


  was:
The feeling on the mailing list was that the M4 release should offer separate Tomcat and Jetty
builds.  If that is to be done, I think we essentially want two versions of the J2EE server
plan that are otherwise identical, or one with two different possible imports for the web
container, or whatever.  With the current plans it appears that your options are Jetty or
Jetty+Tomcat, not Tomcat alone (at least, not without manual editing).  In the end, I think
we want the org/apache/geronimo/Server configuration to have either Tomcat or Jetty but not
both (and no separate org/apache/geronimo/Tomcat configuration).

Note that it should be quite easy to build two separate installer packages based on this.
 I'm not sure it will be as easy to have two separate assembly modules; perhaps the server
selected for the assembly module should be controlled by a property in assembly/project.properties

It would probably be best for this ultimately to migrate to HEAD, but it's urgent that we
have it in the M4 branch (based on the apparent concensus)


> M4: Provide identical Jetty/Tomcat assembly alternatives
> --------------------------------------------------------
>
>          Key: GERONIMO-763
>          URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-763
>      Project: Geronimo
>         Type: Bug
>   Components: Tomcat
>     Versions: 1.0-M3
>     Reporter: Aaron Mulder
>     Assignee: Jeff Genender
>     Priority: Blocker

>
> The feeling on the mailing list was that the M4 release should offer separate Tomcat
and Jetty builds.  If that is to be done, I think we essentially want two versions of the
J2EE server plan that are otherwise identical, or one with two different possible imports
for the web container, or whatever.  With the current plans it appears that your options are
Jetty or Jetty+Tomcat, not Tomcat alone (at least, not without manual editing).  After installation,
I think we want the org/apache/geronimo/Server configuration to have either Tomcat or Jetty
but not both (and no separate org/apache/geronimo/Tomcat configuration).
> Note that it should be quite easy to build two separate installer packages based on this,
and it may be possible to build one installer that includes one app server by default but
allows you to override it with the other.  I'm not sure it will be as easy to have two separate
assembly output directories; perhaps the server selected for the assembly module should be
controlled by a property in assembly/project.properties
> It would probably be best for this ultimately to migrate to HEAD, but it's urgent that
we have it in the M4 branch (based on the apparent concensus)

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators:
   http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see:
   http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira


Mime
View raw message