Hi Samisa,
Big +1 for abstracting out the repo concept. I actually faced all the
difficulties you mentioned
in a project I worked. It is a great idea of keeping the services and
modules in a repo independent way. We can put services and modules as
recommended by the Standard files system for such things and let the
engine load them even when there are no entries in the axis2.xml
regarding their location.
I have a question here. If we start two servers of the same
transport(say http) are we allowed to use the same axis2.xml
configuration file for both servers?. I guess they need different
configuration files located in different places. If someone try to load
from same conf file he should be warned that a server already stared in
the same context and thwart his second attempt.
Damitha
Samisa Abeysinghe wrote:
Hi All,
At the moment, we place all our stuff in the repo. Given the repo
location, one can find the axis2.xml, services and modules folders etc.
However, I think that this is quite limiting and inflexible at
times. Say you want to have two different deployments with different
configurations, but with the same services; or you want the same
modules but with different services, so you want to deploy different
servers. At the moment, if you have such a requirement, what you have
to do it to copy the repo to some other location and use it.
If we abstract out the concept of repo and include the service and
module locations in the axis2.xml file itself, then it would be much
more flexible. Then instead of depending a particular folder structure
to find services and modules, we can use the axis2.xml entries. This
way the configuration becomes much more flexible.
Thoughts please...
Samisa...
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
