geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeff Genender <jgenen...@savoirtech.com>
Subject Re: How do we ship jetty and tomcat versions? Please respond
Date Wed, 07 Sep 2005 01:52:05 GMT


Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> 
> On Sep 6, 2005, at 12:38 AM, Jeff Genender wrote:
> 
>> I like what you have done here.  Very nice work.
>>
>> However, IMHO, I would be concerned in the long run of shipping  Jetty 
>> and Tomcat together.  We will be accused of being too "heavy  weight". 
>> Then also, where do we draw the line of shipping  everything (ie. 
>> multiple orbs, and multiple EB containers, etc).
> 
> 
> How about to distinct distributions, one w/ Tomcat and one w/ Jetty?   
> That might make it clearer and easier for users, as well as let us  know 
> what's popular by download count.

+1...I think this is what people will be expecting.

> 
> As for the multiple orbs, multiple EJBs, etc, I think that depends on  
> if there is a demand and if someone steps up to do the work?  I'm not  
> sure if we have enough info yet, as we only have this issue w/ the  web 
> tier.
> 
> geir
> 
>>
>> Jeff
>>
>> David Jencks wrote:
>>
>>> As part of my work on breaking up our monolithic configuration  into 
>>> smaller pieces, I now have a set of configurations that  modularize 
>>> jetty and tomcat into two configurations each.  These  can be turned 
>>> on and off individually, by means of starting with  different 
>>> config.list files or by an appropriate command line.  It  is equally 
>>> easy to run both at once if you arrange the ports to  avoid collisions.
>>> I'm planning on cleaning this up a bit more and committing it  soon  
>>> (maybe tonight).  If you don't like this idea please speak  up soon.
>>> I wrote a namespace-driven switching module builder to determine  if 
>>> the jetty or tomcat builder is used.  It has a  defaultNamespace  
>>> option which is what currently determines the  target.  The module 
>>> builders register themselves with the switch  and supply their 
>>> namespace.
>>> I would like to:
>>> -- keep the current geronimo-web.xsd with its "any" based deployer  
>>> specific configuration bits
>>> --write jetty and tomcat specific schemas that include the  deployer 
>>> specific configuration directly
>>> In this way, if you know which your target environment is, you can  
>>> write in that schema and the correct deployer will be selected  
>>> automatically.  If you don't, the choice of target environment  will 
>>> come from the defaultNamespace setting in the switch.
>>> The remaining nasty point is the offline deployer, which currently  
>>> includes both the jetty and tomcat builders.  I have not found a  way 
>>> to configure the offline deployer to start more than one  
>>> configuration, so I have been forced to include everything in the  
>>> j2ee-deployer-plan.xml.   I think we should consider if we have  
>>> progressed far enough to eliminate the offline deployer as a  
>>> separate configuration and always use the runtime deployer configs  
>>> both online and offline.  There are still some classloader issues  I 
>>> don't understand well enough for me to try this right now.
>>> So, in more detail, I propose we ship:
>>> -all the configurations, for both jetty and tomcat, installed
>>> - 3 pairs of config.list and config.xml files that run both, only  
>>> jetty, and only tomcat
>>> - both containers and builders running by default.
>>> - installer stuff that lets you pick which option you want installed.
>>> thanks
>>> david jencks
>>>
>>
>>
> 

Mime
View raw message