geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kevan Miller <>
Subject Re: Possible for G to directly consume a Tomcat server config w/o changes?
Date Fri, 12 Jun 2009 17:51:13 GMT

On Jun 5, 2009, at 3:00 AM, David Jencks wrote:

> On Jun 3, 2009, at 10:35 PM, Kevan Miller wrote:
>> On Jun 2, 2009, at 6:46 PM, David Jencks wrote:
>> <snip>
>>> I played with something like this on the plane today..... it might  
>>> not take more that a couple days to get _something_ working that  
>>> interprets server.xml files.  It turns out there's no schema for  
>>> tomcat configurations so it may be an adventure interpreting the  
>>> same files they do.
>>> We might be able to copy their digester configuration but replace  
>>> defaults with geronimo classes instead of tomcat classes.  I find  
>>> digester grammar so hard to understand however that I started by  
>>> generating a schema from a sample file and modifying it to fit the  
>>> digeter rules.
>>> My current idea is to have a TomcatServerGBean that has a  
>>> server.xml as an attribute, which it reads into a jaxb tree, which  
>>> we call a "construct(ClassLoader cl)" method on to set up the  
>>> tomcat objects.  If this works it should be fairly easy.... no  
>>> idea if it will actually work though.
>>> Next step would be a builder that, given a server.xml, sets up  
>>> such a gbean.
>> Sounds interesting. IIUC, this embedded Tomcat instance replaces  
>> our current embedded Tomcat. It improves our ability to configure  
>> this instance -- it's native Tomcat config.
>> Are you thinking about all configuration files? E.g. WEB-INF/ 
>> context.xml, conf/context.xml? There are catalina.policy,  
>>, tomcat-users.xml, also. Hmm. gets a little  
>> messier...
> I have enough working now so I can run the admin console on a server  
> set up this way.  I haven't looked at any files other than  
> server.xml yet.  Some like tomcat-users.xml are for a security realm  
> we aren't going to use or, probably, support using.  Not sure about  
> the others.

Cool. Can you point me to the code?


View raw message