myfaces-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Scott O'Bryan" <darkar...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [Trinidad] Should a non-J2EE demo war be added to the distribution?
Date Wed, 21 May 2008 23:12:03 GMT
Andrew,

Yeah, that's what I proposed.  Paul wants us to "distribute" the 
non-j2ee version with our examples...

Scott

Andrew Robinson wrote:
> We can relatively easily create a tomcat profile that could be used to
> deploy onto tomcat by changing the dependency scope from to provided
> to compile right?
>
> Just as we have the jetty profile and the jetty plugin registered, we
> can do the same for tomcat I think.
>
> The drawback of course is maintaining the poms for different servers
>
> -Andrew
>
> On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 1:36 PM, Scott O'Bryan <darkarena@gmail.com> wrote:
>   
>> Well documentation is easy.  I'm just not excited about having to maintain
>> two trees or wasting a lot of spacing building multiple versions of a demo
>> application when all someone has to do is look at the pre-req's and make
>> sure it's available in their environment.
>>
>> Scott
>>
>> Paul Spencer wrote:
>>     
>>> Scott,
>>>       
>>>> Well I sort of assumed that people wanting configurations outside of the
>>>> standard supported J2EE configuration would compile the branch themselves.
>>>>         
>>> And this is document where :)
>>>
>>> http://myfaces.apache.org/trinidad/trinidad-1_2/FAQ.html
>>> http://myfaces.apache.org/trinidad/trinidad-1_2/trinidad-demo/index.html
>>>
>>>
>>> I am of the opinion that a demo/example should run as distributed and the
>>> installation should be intuitive.  In this case the distribution is build
>>> for a J2EE environment, but it is not obvious to anyone installing it.
>>>
>>> Paul Spencer
>>>
>>> Scott O'Bryan wrote:
>>>       
>>>> Well I sort of assumed that people wanting configurations outside of the
>>>> standard supported J2EE configuration would compile the branch themselves.
>>>>
>>>> Scott
>>>>
>>>> Paul Spencer wrote:
>>>>         
>>>>> Scott,
>>>>> If the Demo includes JSTL, will it work on a J2EE server?
>>>>>  ( I suspect the server will/should complain when 2 copies/version of
>>>>>    JSTL exists )
>>>>>
>>>>> If not then when should distribute :
>>>>>  A) J2EE version and non-J2EE version of Example.zip/tar.gz
>>>>>  or
>>>>>  B) Example.zip/tar.gz containing a J2EE and non-J2EE version of
>>>>>     trinidad-demo.war and trinidad-blank.war
>>>>>
>>>>> Paul Spencer
>>>>>
>>>>> Scott O'Bryan wrote:
>>>>>           
>>>>>> IMO this isn't necessary.  We already control whether we deploy the
>>>>>> myfaces jars using a profile.  Can't we add a profile which includes
the
>>>>>> JSTL jars in the demo when it's built?  Also, it should be easy enough
to
>>>>>> add them to tomcat as a shared library as well.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Scott
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Paul Spencer wrote:
>>>>>>             
>>>>>>> The current Trinidad demo will not work in a non-J2EE container,
i.e.
>>>>>>> Tomcat 6.0, because it does not contain the JSTL jar.  Should
we add a
>>>>>>> non-J2EE demo to the distribution?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I would say yes because it simplifies the process of getting
the demo
>>>>>>> running in an not-J2EE environment.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Paul Spencer
>>>>>>>               
>>>>>>             
>>>>         
>>     


Mime
View raw message