geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Jencks <david_jen...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: More port conflicts
Date Wed, 12 Oct 2005 20:08:46 GMT

On Oct 12, 2005, at 11:48 AM, Dain Sundstrom wrote:

>
> On Oct 11, 2005, at 7:41 PM, Dave Colasurdo wrote:
>
>> 2) Have a separate binary image for both the Jetty and Tomcat 
>> webcontainers.  I'm not suggesting biting off the whole task of 
>> revising the assembly process but rather just merely having two 
>> binaries each with a separate set of config files (config.xml, 
>> config.list).  This could even be a post-build step done on the 
>> common image. This isn't very technically interesting but clearly 
>> communicates to users that there are two separate environments and 
>> they select the download that they want.  Of course, this goes away 
>> if/when the assembly revision is complete.
>
> +1 this is a reasonable compromise.
>

OK, one more idea for the list...

I'm into testing on making  config.xml serve as both the attribute 
store and the persistent configuration list.  When this works, I think 
it would be useful to have a command line parameter that sets the 
location/name of the config.xml file to use  (maybe a system property). 
  Then we could choose the configuration on the command line

java -jar bin/server.jar -Dgeronimo.configuration=geronimo-jetty.xml

Scripts could remove the need to know the  file name :-)

./geronimo-jetty

Would this be adequate and remove the need for separate distributions?

thanks
david jencks


Mime
View raw message