I definitely like the idea of being able easily include another file,
and prefer xml includes. Aaron has a good point about the problems.
Maybe we can do the include thing, and then on the client side of the
deploy tool, read the xml document into a DOM, which could cause all
of the includes to resolve. Then we can just write the integrated
xml over the wire to the deployment server.
-dain
On Jun 26, 2005, at 10:28 PM, Aaron Mulder wrote:
On Tue, 14 Jun 2005, Jeff Genender wrote:
I was talking with Bruce about making the Jetty/Tomcat choice a
simple
comment and uncomment task and we came up with a possible idea and
wanted to
run this by people.
Can the plan parsers support the <!ENTITY> to be used as an include?
Example:
<!ENTITY jetty SYSTEM "includes/jetty.xml">
I like the idea of splitting out the Tomcat and Jetty information.
I'm not sure how well the deployer will handle it if you give it an
XML
file as a deployment plan argument and that XML file imports or
includes
other XML files. Certainly JSR-88 only lets you specify a single
"deployment plan" file, which is why we need to be able to put all an
EAR's modules' deployment information into a single file -- so remote
deployment would undoubtedly not work this way (though this only
matters
if you're trying to redeploy your J2EE server configuration remotely,
which would be a little odd).
In any case, it might be more workable if part of the build
process did some kind of file merging. We already run velocity on the
plans -- I bet there's some way to have velocity insert either
"jetty-content.xml" or "tomcat-content.xml" into "j2ee-server-
plan.xml" at
about the same time we substitute version numbers and things. Then
if all
goes well, you could just do something like "maven -
Dweb.container=tomcat"
or whatever, and it would produce a formatted server plan with the
appropriate web container content.
Aaron
I am sure you can start to see the idea? The idea is to remove all
references to Jetty in the j2ee-server-plan.xml, and allow it to
"include"
the proper configuration. We can do this for the deployer and
runtime-deployer plans as well. This way we only need to comment/
uncomment
just a couple of places.
Is this something that is doable? Thoughts?
Jeff
