geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jason Dillon <>
Subject Re: GERONIMO-1526
Date Mon, 21 Aug 2006 21:42:26 GMT
I think it is fine to use File for now... its simpler... though I'd  
still like to entertain the idea of using VFS to abstract all things  


On Aug 21, 2006, at 2:35 PM, Dain Sundstrom wrote:

> On Aug 21, 2006, at 1:39 PM, Jason Dillon wrote:
>> On Aug 21, 2006, at 1:31 PM, Dain Sundstrom wrote:
>>> I think using URLs instead of files, is going to be very  
>>> difficult.  We had tons of problems dealing with paths containing  
>>> spaces and urls.  IIRC we had to encode and decode URLs all the  
>>> time.  Also, some deployers need to scan the directories.  For  
>>> example, the RAR deployer needs to add all jar files in the  
>>> archive/directory to the class path.  In Jee5 ear files we need  
>>> to scan for all nested modules.
>> Ya maybe... I was just thinking about deploying from things other  
>> than files, like an http:// address or nested jar, or some other  
>> custom protocol.  Using URL allows flexibility by abstraction...  
>> where using File binds you to files, since we have no way to  
>> augment them.
> I understand. Originally, I wanted the deployers to work that way  
> also.  Then after reading the source for URL, it occurred to me  
> that the VM downloads the content to the local file system anyway,  
> so if we download them ourselves it is equivalent.  Actually, doing  
> it ourselves has a lot of benefits.  The VM likes to cache urls in  
> a cache you can't flush, so redeploy tends to break.  Also File is  
> just easier to use than URL.
> -dain

View raw message