I have used G without openEJB extensively in the past. It works well.
Thanks Anita --- Aaron Mulder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > In truth, I think we can go further in allowing for > a "mini-Geronimo". > For example, right now IIRC the core J2EE > configuration contains > OpenEJB, and we could probably break out OpenEJB > into a separate > configuration to let you easily configure a server > without it. I > think I've been convinced that more/smaller > configurations is the way > to go, though we haven't figured out for sure how > granular they should > get. > > Thanks, > Aaron > > On 12/19/05, Jan Bartel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Faisal, > > > > You can use either standalone Tomcat or Jetty > containers to give > > you web container plus a couple of j2ee frills > like jndi, resource > > mapping etc etc. > > > > However, if you want to keep within the geronimo > idiom, then Erik's > > answer re cut-down installation is the way to go. > > > > regards > > Jan > > > > Wade Chandler wrote: > > > --- Faisal Akeel > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > > > > > >>If you look at the top reason that FireFox more > > >>preferred over Mozilla > > >>suite, this is because its small size and > limited > > >>focus feature. > > >>So, Is there way to customize Geronimo to a > simple > > >>web container (jetty) and > > >>small foot print database (derby) only, instead > of > > >>big J2EE application and > > >>if it possible can anyone provide guide or a > demo > > >>example on the wiki web > > >>site. > > >>Some people like mini cooper over big SUV car. > > >> > > > > > > > > > That's what Tomcat is for. > > > > > > Wade > > > > > > > > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
