geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jason Dillon <ja...@planet57.com>
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  
file...

--jason


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


Mime
View raw message