Peter, Yeah I think the route taken (one application repo verse many) is application specific. I guess your example shows that in a way. Did you see Steve's response? It does not really matter for me this is a semantics issue. Anyway I agree with you to leave it up to the user to decide how to slice and dice with the ginsu knife.
> I'm trying to think of reasons to have multiple repositories. Security > may be one. [Karasulu, Alex] Sounds good but I can't think of a concrete example right now. > The system repository contains the bootstrapping resources so multiple > versions of merlin could be run, which may be important if merlin > changes dramatically. [Karasulu, Alex] Versioning is another good idea. The repo structure could be played with in other Merlin releases. The hierarchical repo discussion earlier could be put to the test in another application repo - it would have to I guess. Good idea! > I started to look at this as I was embedding merlin as a component > service in a turbine app of mine. The question was:- should we have a > complete merlin installation in webapp/WEB-INF? Steve suggested that > this is normally a read-only location which would have implications for > programmatic updating of artifacts in a repository. If we were moving > out of the WEB-INF directory then it made sense to perhaps think of a > local repository which could hold artifacts for any merlin component. I > was therefore very interested in your work on kernel context and > builder. > > I don't know the answer but consider the following structure : > > > Merlin > |--- James > > |--- Jetty > |--- webapp > |--- Merlin > > |--- webapp > |--- Merlin > > |--- Ldapd > > |--- FtpServer > [Karasulu, Alex] BU, Alex --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
