geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Jencks <>
Subject Re: Web container-specific configuration
Date Tue, 23 Aug 2005 02:08:05 GMT
After talking this issue over with Jeremy a bit and thinking about it 
some more I don't think that the generic multi-container schema is a 
good idea.  I think the deployment system should be based on

namespace determines builder

and that we should not do anything that will make this difficult in the 

If the packaging plugin was working, we could, for each app (such as 
the console) that needs to run on both containers, generate  a 
configuration for each container.  Then you could run either one, 
without rebuilding geronimo or the application config.

I'm going to work on a proposal for schemas that would help keep the 
configs for different containers as similar as possible.

Meanwhile I've committed the "any" solution as I think it is 
considerably better than what we have now.  One problem with this is 
that most tomcat configurations will not in fact be portable: if they 
contain tomcat realm or tomcat valve gbeans, the config just plain 
won't deploy under jetty.  It might not be so easy, but I'm sure there 
are equivalent ways to get in trouble using jetty.

Until we actually have the packaging plugin working, I suggest we have 
the tomcat and jetty builders munge a generic namespace to their 
specific namespace, so that completely generic plans will still deploy 
on both.

david jencks

On Aug 22, 2005, at 5:51 PM, Jeff Genender wrote:

>> -----Original Message-----
>> The first would result in a configuration that could run on
>> any web container, the last two would produce configurations
>> that would run on a specific web container. Applications
>> would typically use the first form unless they needed
>> container-specific functionality (which would also mean that
>> they needed that specific container at runtime).
>> I included the namespace qualifiers for clarity. I believe
>> that suitable use of schema imports would mean that they
>> could be removed simplifying the XML form used by users. It
>> may be harder for us to implement, but I think ease-of-use is
>> more important here than ease-of-implementation.
>> --
>> Jeremy
> Everything you proposed is fine with me except for forcing the 
> namespace for
> one container.  I think we should have a universal web plan that will 
> be
> accepted under both containers.  So I would ask that we allow the 
> generic
> file to be allowed to include both a jetty and tomcat name space.  
> This will
> make our applications, like the console and debugtool to have 1
> geronimo-web.xml per app.  IMHO this is a much simpler way to manage 
> the
> apps that must run under both containers.  I believe this is how DJ
> implemented it.
> Jeff

View raw message