Here is an idea for #2....
If we pull Jetty out into its own plan...the user just needs to edit the
config.list file. The j2ee-server-jetty-plan.xml can be the default in
the config.list...with j2ee-server-tomcat-plan.xml commented out. If
the user wants to swap, they just edit the config.list and
comment/uncomment.
Thoughts?
Jeff
Jeff Genender wrote:
+1 for #1. If you go for #2...we need to make it easy to
comment/uncomment, etc. IMHO, the less technically astute will not like
option #2...as they won't necessarily like to have to build an assembly.
OTOH, if there is a way to easily activate one or the other via a config
file w/o the need to rebuild, this would make #2 more acceptable.
Just my .02.
Jeff
David Blevins wrote:
On Tue, Jul 05, 2005 at 10:32:03AM +0200, Jacek Laskowski wrote:
David Blevins wrote:
So what does the group want?
1) Separate builds
2) Jetty as the default
Both tested against TCK.
I was going for a pick one response. As in:
1) Separate builds (one jetty build and one tomcat build)
2) One build (both jetty and tomcat in the same build) with jetty as
default.
-David
