Awesome. I'll make this change for netui-blank but will leave
netui-jsf and netui-samples for the sake of stability. We can fix
those for Beehive 1.1.
This would switch the default NetUI project model to something that
looks like this:
http://jakarta.apache.org/tomcat/tomcat-5.0-doc/appdev/source.html
which is basically:
fooWebProject/
web/
src/
build.xml
build.properties
with a build that works like samples/petstoreWeb.
Any other thoughts about doing this?
Eddie
On 9/9/05, Rich Feit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I definitely agree on #2 (if I'm understanding you correctly) -- I think
> it should support the Tomcat model you're describing. Originally I'd
> suggested supporting both because netui-blank is in the old project
> model, so I assumed that this is the only one we would be supporting.
> So I support making this change...
>
> Rich
>
> Eddie O'Neil wrote:
>
> >
> > 1) yes, this simply adds a convenience target to beehive-imports.xml.
> > It doesn't attempt to fix the validation problem discussed earlier --
> > depending on how it's fixed, that might be an SVN-side issue with
> > building the distribution.
> >
> > 2) I agree that we are moving away from the WEB-INF/src project model
> > and onto the Tomcat model where web/ and src/ are peers. This target
> > certainly could support both models, but it's just easier to have it
> > support the one Tomcat prescribes that is widely used and is easily
> > supported in various IDEs. We can document how to setup a project
> > with source-in-webapp. If there was enough interest, we could make
> > this change now...it only affects netui-samples, netui-blank, and
> > netui-jsf.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > Eddie
> >
> >
> >
> > Rich Feit wrote:
> >
> >> I see - so this isn't the complex part of the change we were talking
> >> about. This is simply adding an ant target to beehive-imports.xml. It
> >> seems like a good addition, but one question I have is whether we should
> >> be supporting different project models with something like this. Seems
> >> like we're moving away from a source-under-web-content model. What do
> >> you think?
> >> Rich
> >>
> >> Eddie O'Neil wrote:
> >>
> >>> Here's the Ant that will do this; it patches
> >>> trunk/user/beehive-imports.xml and can be run as:
> >>>
> >>> $> ant -f beehive-imports.xml new.netui.webapp
> >>>
> >>> which will prompt for a destination directory for the project. Or, it
> >>> can be run like:
> >>>
> >>> $> ant -f beehive-imports.xml new.netui.webapp -Dwebapp.dir
> >>>
> >>> which will skp the prompt since "webapp.dir" has already been provided.
> >>>
> >>> I think this will be *really* useful and less error-prone than the
> >>> alternative.
> >>>
> >>> Thoughts?
> >>>
> >>> Eddie
> >>>
> >>> <snip>
> >>> <target name="new.netui.webapp" description="Create
> >>> a new NetUI-enabled Beehive webapp">
> >>> <input message="Provide a fully-qualified web project path:"
> >>> addproperty="webapp.dir"/>
> >>>
> >>> <copy todir="${webapp.dir}">
> >>> <fileset dir="${basedir}/samples/netui-blank">
> >>> <include name="**/*"/>
> >>> </fileset>
> >>> </copy>
> >>> <deploy-netui webappDir="${webapp.dir}"/>
> >>> <echo>Created a NetUI-enabled in ${webapp.dir}</echo>
> >>> </target>
> >>> </snip>
> >>>
> >>> On 9/9/05, Eddie O'Neil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> Gotcha. As far as the docs, I've got a placeholder in the
> >>>> netui/projects.xml doc already that describes the cp / ant -f step.
> >>>> So, that part is easy. ;)
> >>>>
> >>>> Patch forthcoming...
> >>>>
> >>>> Eddie
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On 9/9/05, Rich Feit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> Oh, I just meant we should take a week to have people play with it
> >>>>> if we
> >>>>> put it in for 1.0, that's all. I think we'd want to get it into the
> >>>>> docs, too, especially where there are instructions for copying
> >>>>> netui-blank, etc. What do you think about that?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I'd definitely take a look at the diff, though, even if it's
> >>>>> something
> >>>>> we hold until v1.1.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Rich
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Eddie O'Neil wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Yeah -- I don't think it would take a week (probably just a couple
> >>>>>> of hours), but it's a little different than how we do things
> >>>>>> right now
> >>>>>> because we need to support two scenarios:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> - create a new webapp
> >>>>>> - inject the runtime files (JARs / resources) into the samples
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> We've got the latter and could easily add the former.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> But, we'll get very little test mileage on it in the near term. I
> >>>>>> can take a crack at it and see what you think of the diff...
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Eddie
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On 9/9/05, Rich Feit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Definitely, this would be a great thing to have. I have a local
> >>>>>>> script
> >>>>>>> that does exactly this -- in retrospect, this should have made
> >>>>>>> me think
> >>>>>>> of an ant target. I think it's something that we should do for
> >>>>>>> 1.1,
> >>>>>>> unless we want to delay the release for a week or so...
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Rich
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Eddie O'Neil wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> It's complicated. :)
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> We really need a target that can "seed" a Beehive webapp including
> >>>>>>>> all of the validation config files, runtime JARs, and NetUI URL
> >>>>>>>> addressable resources. Today, this is done using a command like:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> cp -rf samples/netui-blank <project-dir>
> >>>>>>>> ant -f ant/beehive-runtime.xml deploy.beehive.webapp.runtime
> >>>>>>>> -Dwebapp.dir=<project-dir>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> If, for example, you just do the latter, you'll end up with a
> >>>>>>>> webapp
> >>>>>>>> that has the runtime but no web.xml or validation config
> >>>>>>>> files. And,
> >>>>>>>> that's kind of bad...
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Would be *very* nice to have a target that just does:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> ant -f beehive-imports.xml new.beehive.webapp -Dproject.dir=...
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> It could even prompt for the project.dir -- kind of like a new
> >>>>>>>> project
> >>>>>>>> wizard in Ant.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> We could do this for 1.0, but it's not an insignificant change.
> >>>>>>>> It's *definitely* something we need for 1.1...
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Eddie
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On 9/9/05, Rich Feit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Yeah, if it's complicated at all, I agree.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Daryl Olander wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> +1 to doing the real fix post 1.0
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> On 9/9/05, Eddie O'Neil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> I take it back...this isn't a straightforward thing to fix
> >>>>>>>>>>> unfortunately because it affects the Ant used to provide the
> >>>>>>>>>>> runtime
> >>>>>>>>>>> in both the distribution and SVN builds.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> It wouldn't be hard to change it, but if we're going to do
> >>>>>>>>>>> that, we
> >>>>>>>>>>> should add the beehive-netui-validator-config.xml file (and
> >>>>>>>>>>> consider
> >>>>>>>>>>> adding web.xml) to those as well...
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> I agree (now) having them checked in is the right thing
> >>>>>>>>>>> unless we
> >>>>>>>>>>> want to tackle the bigger problem of copying all of the
> >>>>>>>>>>> config files.
> >>>>>>>>>>> And, I'd rather ship 1.0 and fix that later. :)
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Eddie
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> On 9/9/05, Rich Feit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> OK, I certainly don't have an objection to that... thanks.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Rich
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Eddie O'Neil wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Right, it doesn't *have* to happen now, but doing it now
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> ensures
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> that we're consistent. So, I'm going to go ahead and fix
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> while you're
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> getting the compiler change in.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> :)
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Eddie
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Rich Feit wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I haven't started it -- it doesn't seem like anything
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> that has to go
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> into v1, right? Just checking. I did update the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> checked-in files to
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> be
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> of the right version -- this is just the longer-term fix
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> to ensure
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> that
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> this doesn't happen again... :)
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rich
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Eddie O'Neil wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rich--
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Have you started fixing BEEHIVE-914 yet? If not, let me
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> know and
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'll take that one.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Eddie
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >
>
