geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Aaron Mulder <ammul...@alumni.princeton.edu>
Subject Re: Apache mini Geronimo (mini-G)
Date Tue, 20 Dec 2005 01:41:19 GMT
In truth, I think we can go further in allowing for a "mini-Geronimo".
 For example, right now IIRC the core J2EE configuration contains
OpenEJB, and we could probably break out OpenEJB into a separate
configuration to let you easily configure a server without it.  I
think I've been convinced that more/smaller configurations is the way
to go, though we haven't figured out for sure how granular they should
get.

Thanks,
    Aaron

On 12/19/05, Jan Bartel <janb@mortbay.com> wrote:
> Faisal,
>
> You can use either standalone Tomcat or Jetty containers to give
> you web container plus a couple of j2ee frills like jndi, resource
> mapping etc etc.
>
> However, if you want to keep within the geronimo idiom, then Erik's
> answer re cut-down installation is the way to go.
>
> regards
> Jan
>
> Wade Chandler wrote:
> > --- Faisal Akeel <faisal.akeel-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>If you look at the top reason that FireFox more
> >>preferred over Mozilla
> >>suite, this is because its small size and limited
> >>focus feature.
> >>So, Is there way to customize Geronimo to a simple
> >>web container (jetty) and
> >>small foot print database (derby) only, instead of
> >>big J2EE application and
> >>if it possible can anyone provide guide or a demo
> >>example on the wiki web
> >>site.
> >>Some people like mini cooper over big SUV car.
> >>
> >
> >
> > That's what Tomcat is for.
> >
> > Wade
> >
>
>

Mime
View raw message