xml-rpc-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Daniel Rall <...@finemaltcoding.com>
Subject Re: WebServer.java
Date Thu, 15 Aug 2002 16:45:48 GMT
"Rob Walker" <robw@softsell.com> writes:

> > Funny that, I was looking at replacing the WebServer for our local
> > implementation so that I could split off a particular class of HTTP
> > request.
> > 
> > The problem with relying entirely on a servlet engine is one of
> > speed (mentioned already), but also of dependencies. The current
> > xml-rpc package is quite small and is self-contained. Requiring
> > a servlet implementation means that an application that uses
> > xml-rpc must embed and distribute a servlet engine, be
> > embedded in a servlet engine, or distributed as a WAR or similar.
> > 
> > I haven't seen a servlet engine that is as simple to embed as
> > the WebServer (although I would like to be wrong). I think that
> > people embedding XML-RPC functionality in their applications may
> > also be concerned about losing control over how threads and
> > synchronicity are managed.
> 
> Agree entirely - Jetty is very good, but would be a fairly substantial addition 
> to the xml/rpc distribution both in size and in having more to understand and 
> configure. 

IMHO, including a full-blown servlet engine in the XML-RPC shouldn't
be considered an option at all.

> My vote would be to keep the current model and show people how they
> can embed it e.g. as described above. It only took us a couple of
> hours to figure out the hook-up for servlet use based on the current
> docs, and we're no experts!

Documentation like this would be great!  It isn't a very high priority
for me personally, but if anyone wanted to contribute it, woo hoo!
-- 

Daniel Rall <dlr@finemaltcoding.com>

Mime
View raw message