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: Default war deployed w/o plan gets /WebApp_ID context?
Date Tue, 16 Jun 2009 07:40:27 GMT

On Jun 16, 2009, at 12:08 AM, Jason Dillon wrote:

> I have to retract this with some shame... *blush*
>
> I didn't realize that all of the silly webapps I was testing had  
> their <web-app id="WebApp_ID" ...

It's news to me that tomcat does this.... it must be a result of  
feeding the web.xml into digester.  I'm pretty sure jetty ignores any  
id attributes.... this is pretty weird use of the id attribute IMHO  
and is certainly beyond the spec.

thanks
david jencks

>
> OMG.
>
> --jason
>
>
> On Jun 16, 2009, at 1:29 PM, Jason Dillon wrote:
>
>> Even a random context would be better than always using "/ 
>> WebApp_ID"... but I would imagine that it should first try and  
>> create a unique context from the filename, encoding muck as  
>> needed.  Otherwise, how about something more like "/webapp<counter>".
>>
>> --jason
>>
>>
>> On Jun 16, 2009, at 1:15 PM, Shawn Jiang wrote:
>>
>>> Agreed, use war file name as the default context  is a good start.
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 2:01 PM, Ivan <xhhsld@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> WebApp_ID is not so friendly, not sure when it begins, this should  
>>> be improved, maybe we could use the war file's name as the default  
>>> context.
>>>
>>> 2009/6/16 Jason Dillon <jason@planet57.com>
>>> Aren't we trying to do something a little bit more intelligent  
>>> about picking a context for deployed wars w/o a plan.xml?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Seems like all of these "default/..." wars want to mount under / 
>>> WebApp_ID... forcing me to make a plan for them, just to set the  
>>> context.
>>>
>>> Is this how it always worked?
>>>
>>> --jason
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> Ivan
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> Shawn
>>
>


Mime
View raw message