Please keep in mind the tooling scenarios for this as well.
I would eventually like like to see some type of granulized update
support. For example, if a user is developing a large application and
testing on a remote server, if a single file in a module is changed, it
would be quite an overhead for the entire application to have to be
repackaged and sent over the network. We need to think about being able
to send partial updates to a remote server.
Sachin
Joe Bohn wrote:
+1
I was thinking the same thing. If implemented as a servlet it should be
independent of the console. What is used for local deploy should be
the same as remote deploy.
Joe
Dave Colasurdo wrote:
Aaron Mulder wrote:
Forget about multiple web containers. The issue is, I know there's a
servlet o.a.g.RemoteDeployerServlet running in some web app in
Geronimo. What is the URL to contact it? To start with, you need to
determine which web application it's in (since we already use
different names for the console for Jetty/Tomcat you can't just
hardcode a name), and then you need to determine what the URL is to
access that web application, which means inspecting its list of
connectors.
Is remote deployment unique to the web console? Shouldn't remote
deployment also be possible from the command line or programatically
via JMX. Projects/products that embed Geronimo may wish to remove the
web console altogether in an attempt to use G as a hidden embedded
server for their application with only their preset configurations.
Perhaps a new non-webcontainer specific ( not specific to jetty or
tomcat) file transfer web application that is not tied to the console
should be created.
