jakarta-cactus-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Vincent Massol" <vmas...@pivolis.com>
Subject RE: Starting/Stopping Resin with Ant
Date Wed, 25 Feb 2004 10:07:49 GMT
Hi Chris,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Christopher Lenz [mailto:cmlenz@gmx.de]
> Sent: 25 February 2004 10:56
> To: Cactus Users List
> Subject: Re: Starting/Stopping Resin with Ant
> 
> Am 25.02.2004 um 10:15 schrieb Vincent Massol:
> >> I believe we already have this functionality in <runservertests>
> >> (although not documented):
> >>
> >>    <runservertests testurl="...">
> >>      <start target="start.resin"/>
> >>      <test>
> >>        <!-- Here you can invoke any Ant tasks you like -->
> >>        <echo>Here we go</echo>
> >>        <antcall target="foo"/>
> >>        <antcall target="bar"/>
> >>      </test>
> >>      <stop target="stop.resin"/>
> >>    </runservertests>
> >
> > But you'll have to implement the start.resin goal no? It's not
calling
> > the o.a.c.i.a.c.resin.* classes , right?
> 
> Ah, I thought I was missing something :-)
> 
> In that case I'd suggest extending <runservertests> so that it would
> accept a nested <containerset>, similar to <cactus>. This approach
> would be much cleaner than providing separate <startcontainer> and
> <stopcontainer> tasks IMHO.

Except that :
1/ we don't need/want a containerset, just a single container (unless
you wish to start several containers in parallel).
2/ it's not about run server tests. It's simply about starting a
container. Thus the name is misleading. I'd much prefer a new task.

> 
> That can get messy though, because the task basically gets two
> different modes: the first is using the classic start/stop hooks, the
> second mode would be based on container sets. Note that the first mode
> could be dropped, because a generic container inside a container set
> supports the same semantics, but simply dropping the start/stop hooks
> would break backward compatibility. I recall working on this, but gave
> up because I didn't need it myself.
> 
> This would be simpler if we'd simply make this a new task
> (<runcontainer> or <incontainer>?).

that's what I'm proposing with startcontainer/stopcontainer/runcontainer
I think.

Thanks
-Vincent


Mime
View raw message