(Jeff and Scott, there is more general mav question for you guys at the
bottom, so please skim down or keep reading).

Hi Dan,

Maybe I still misunderstand, but it seems that if all you are providing is
an engine (controllers and java classes) but no jsp's, xsl's, graphics, etc,
then the war is overkill. Why not just jar your stuff and instruct you
clients to make their own war with your jar in that web-apps lib directory.
Or ship them a skeleton war, with only your jar, maverick.jar, etc. in the
lib directory, and some instructions on how to fill it out. You could also
ship a basic exampleapp.war that had your jar in it along with config files,
templates, and graphics to illustrate how to set things up.

It just seems that if the customer is defining maverick.xml, all templates,
and the graphics, then you are not sending them a fully working webapp
anyway, so there is no reason to expect there app to live separately from
your war.

--general question

This does raise the question of how to set up easily configurable skins in
maverick though. Currently I believe it would be difficult to have multiple
skins that were configurable with a single param (i.e. <skin>skinA</skin> or
<skin>skinB<skin>). This is somewhat the same problem as i18n where you want
to say, "if the user's language is english, use these templates. if french,
use these other templates." Skins are similar. If the user has selected
skinA, use these templates, if they chose skinB, use these other templates.

--jim

----- Original Message -----
From: "Dan Finkelstein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2002 12:26 AM
Subject: Re: [Mav-user] 2.0 Installation Issues


> Jim,
>
> Let me explain my _exact_ requirements...  I want to package up a war
which
> can be distributed to a number of customers.  Alongside each war, the
> customers will develop front end pages in order to control the page
layout,
> the graphics, and the navigation between pages.  Basically, a customer can
> create any look and feel he wants, simply calling into our underlying
> "engine," which in this case based on Maverick.  My idea is that the
> maverick.xml file, the velocity templates, any html files and gifs would
be
> accessed from some specified directory and the war was made aware of that
> directory -- probably through a configuration parameter of some sort.
>
> (Jeff, I'm really not sure about your shunting idea -- I really don't
> understand shunting and will just wait for the docs to understand it.)
>
> Does that make sense?  Or is there a simpler way to do this?
> Dan
>
> At 05:13 PM 2/6/02 -0500, jim moore wrote:
> >As for point 3, if I understand you correctly, you want to put skin
folders
> >on the same level as web app folders. I personally think this is a bad
idea.
> >For one, the container will think of that new skin folder as a web-app.
> >Better would be to have a skins folder inside the web app where you could
> >drop additional skins.
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Dan Finkelstein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2002 5:02 PM
> >Subject: [Mav-user] 2.0 Installation Issues
> >
> >
> > > Hi --
> > >
> > > I'm using 2.0 beta 1.  When you're writing the doc for 2.0, the
problems
> > > I've been having might be useful to document.
> > >
> > > 1.  On loading, I get errors that log4j isn't properly configured.  I
> >added
> > > a log4j initialization call in Dispatcher.init() and that seemed to do
the
> > > trick.  (I grepped the sources but didn't see any explicit
initialization
> > > occurring.  I also added simple properties file that log4j needed.)
> > >
> > > 2.   When running friendship-velocity, it gave me errors that were
only
> > > resolved when I added in xalan.jar and xml-apis.jar.  I had to
download
> > > xalan from jakarta since it wasn't in the distribution.  The readme
note
> > > says to put them in the web server's lib directory.  Could the
friendship
> > > war have been built with these files inside, which is more typical?
> > >
> > > 3.  I'm interested in distributing different "skins" which would run
> > > alongside the war file.  Thus, I would like maverick.xml, the vm
files,
> > > html files, gif files, etc to live in a separate directory.  I think
> > > maverick is wired to expect them inside right now.  What do you think
of
> > > this idea?
> > >
> > > I'll probably have more questions later....   Thanks for any help,
> > >
> > > Dan
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Mav-user mailing list
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mav-user
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Mav-user mailing list
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mav-user
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mav-user mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mav-user


_______________________________________________
Mav-user mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mav-user

Reply via email to