+1 I think people are much more likely to down load the light thing more often during development than to down load a large distribution. We don't swap out Axis and Tomcat often, but you may pick up loads more frequently. Ken is right, we need to include documentation what is necessary to get the thing running.
> -----Original Message----- > From: Ken Tam > Sent: Friday, October 08, 2004 7:25 AM > To: Beehive Developers > Subject: RE: [proposal]: directory structure for a Beehive > distribution > > > Agree having a core platform neutral distribution is step 0 -- I do > think at least having instructions on how to turn that core > distribution > into something immediately usable is really important. So even if we > don't actually build a distro in the near term that > _contains_ bits like > Axis and Tomcat, we shouldn't consider the core distro > complete until it > has clear directions on how users can do their own bolting on of those > bits. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Eddie O'Neil > Sent: Friday, October 08, 2004 4:49 AM > To: Beehive Developers > Subject: Re: [proposal]: directory structure for a Beehive > distribution > > > Agreed, and good points. Including Axis (a runtime for WSM) is an > argument for including Tomcat (a runtime for NetUI). For now, I'd > rather go without and we can include containers on which WSM / NetUI > artifacts execute at some point with a heavier distribution. > > I'm going to start working on getting the core of the proposed > distribution structure going. We can bolt on Axis / Tomcat later > pending the outcome of this discussion. > > Thanks for the feedback. > > Eddie > > > > Kyle Marvin wrote: > >>We need to be very careful to separate the components (jars/build > >>support/etc) that are platform-neutral (like Axis > >>jars) from those that enable Beehive to be integrated with a > >>specific runtime platform (Axis, Tomcat etc). > >> > > > > > > Sorry... Axis jars are an example of something > platform-specific *not* > platform neutral. > > > > -- Kyle > > > >
