Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact tomcat-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 41906 invoked from network); 24 Jan 2000 03:56:00 -0000 Received: from mta2.snfc21.pbi.net (206.13.28.123) by 63.211.145.10 with SMTP; 24 Jan 2000 03:56:00 -0000 Received: from pacbell.net ([207.214.216.220]) by mta2.snfc21.pbi.net (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.1999.09.16.21.57.p8) with ESMTP id <0FOT00GP4MM53M@mta2.snfc21.pbi.net> for tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org; Sun, 23 Jan 2000 19:49:18 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2000 19:57:23 -0800 From: James Todd Subject: Re: WAR Files To: tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org Message-id: <388BCDA3.659FF89B@pacbell.net> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en]C-CCK-MCD {Sony} (Win98; I) Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Accept-Language: en References: <005601bf61e4$00bd0a90$3f994cd4@picturesafe.de> Wolfgang Werner wrote: > > The current code had an attempt to serve files directly from > > War ( so user can just copy the war and use it) - but this > > is bad from several reasons, and if nobody insists enough on > > having this it will be probably removed. > > This says: It is working (yet) - so why not at my site? Are there other > constraints / rules to be followed, magic wisdom? > > > Reasons why serving from war is bad: > > - Apache ( and other servers) - static files are better served > > by apache, tomcat is not optimized for serving static files. > > OK, but IMHO the ease of use of a war file is a much bigger gain. > > > - code is complex - take a look at the code, there are too many > > special cases added all over the code > > As of know I do not have too much insight in the code - but is this not only > a question of a 'knowing' class/file loader? yep ... that's where it got weird. on the upside though (as i don't like to dwell on "how bad the world is") i do believe this feature would barely mucky things up at on in the class loader space if one chooses to support JarURLConnection as provided in jdk 1.2.x. making this happen in a jdk1.1.x world, with other issues at hand, was a pain and highlighted things that needed to be refactored. > > > > - it is not enough - to install the application, you still > > need a deploy tool ( or manual actions). For example > > editing apache config, editing server.xml. > > Yes, but better two manual task than three, gee? yep. i'm sure there are other reasons as well. > > > It appears to me as if the servlet v2.2 spec is written with the idea of serving > from a war file in mind? my interpretation is that an implementation is free to expand internally as long as the pristine war is all that is delivered. on that note, i'd like to see the need for this internal expansion an option. > > > Wolfgang > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: tomcat-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: tomcat-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org