On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 4:59 AM, Scott O'Bryan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Right. I'm for #3... And lets face it. The EASIEST way to run the demo is > to download the tag and in the demo directory type mvn jetty:run..
+1 on that. If they contain doesn't ship what it should... why should we fix that ? Documentation on Tomcat/jetty doesn't hurt! -M > > Hey Paul, do you want to contribute the documentation via the website or > wiki? > > Scott > > Paul Spencer wrote: >> >> Scott and Andrew, >> The goal is to make it easy for a user to get the demo up and running with >> minimal frustration. Since I am not currently working in a J2EE >> environment, my desire to quickly get the demo running in order to test the >> 1.2.8 release did not include a J2EE server. I dropped the war in an >> available Tomcat server and then had to determine why the demo failed to >> run. After determining the I need a JSTL jar, I was able to test the >> release. >> >> I make the following suggested solutions, in order of preference: >> >> 1) "distribute" a non-J2EE Demo and Blank either in the existing Example >> distribution or in an non-J2EE distribution. >> >> 2) Add installation instruction that include instructions for J2EE and >> non-J2EE environments. The instructions, including any required jars, >> should be included in the .zip/.tar.gz file. >> >> 3) Add instructions on building a non-J2EE environment from the source. >> >> What ever solution is chosen, the instructions should also be on the >> Demo's web page[1]. >> >> Paul Spencer >> >> >> [1]http://myfaces.apache.org/trinidad/trinidad-1_2/trinidad-demo/index.html >> >> >> Scott O'Bryan wrote: >>> >>> Andrew, >>> >>> Yeah, that's what I proposed. Paul wants us to "distribute" the non-j2ee >>> version with our examples... >>> >>> Scott >>> >>> Andrew Robinson wrote: >>> >>>> We can relatively easily create a tomcat profile that could be used to >>>> deploy onto tomcat by changing the dependency scope from to provided >>>> to compile right? >>>> >>>> Just as we have the jetty profile and the jetty plugin registered, we >>>> can do the same for tomcat I think. >>>> >>>> The drawback of course is maintaining the poms for different servers >>>> >>>> -Andrew >>>> >>>> On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 1:36 PM, Scott O'Bryan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Well documentation is easy. I'm just not excited about having to >>>>> maintain >>>>> two trees or wasting a lot of spacing building multiple versions of a >>>>> demo >>>>> application when all someone has to do is look at the pre-req's and >>>>> make >>>>> sure it's available in their environment. >>>>> >>>>> Scott >>>>> >>>>> Paul Spencer wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Scott, >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Well I sort of assumed that people wanting configurations outside of >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> standard supported J2EE configuration would compile the branch >>>>>>> themselves. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> And this is document where :) >>>>>> >>>>>> http://myfaces.apache.org/trinidad/trinidad-1_2/FAQ.html >>>>>> >>>>>> http://myfaces.apache.org/trinidad/trinidad-1_2/trinidad-demo/index.html >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I am of the opinion that a demo/example should run as distributed and >>>>>> the >>>>>> installation should be intuitive. In this case the distribution is >>>>>> build >>>>>> for a J2EE environment, but it is not obvious to anyone installing it. >>>>>> >>>>>> Paul Spencer >>>>>> >>>>>> Scott O'Bryan wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Well I sort of assumed that people wanting configurations outside of >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> standard supported J2EE configuration would compile the branch >>>>>>> themselves. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Scott >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Paul Spencer wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Scott, >>>>>>>> If the Demo includes JSTL, will it work on a J2EE server? >>>>>>>> ( I suspect the server will/should complain when 2 copies/version >>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>> JSTL exists ) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> If not then when should distribute : >>>>>>>> A) J2EE version and non-J2EE version of Example.zip/tar.gz >>>>>>>> or >>>>>>>> B) Example.zip/tar.gz containing a J2EE and non-J2EE version of >>>>>>>> trinidad-demo.war and trinidad-blank.war >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Paul Spencer >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Scott O'Bryan wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> IMO this isn't necessary. We already control whether we deploy the >>>>>>>>> myfaces jars using a profile. Can't we add a profile which >>>>>>>>> includes the >>>>>>>>> JSTL jars in the demo when it's built? Also, it should be easy >>>>>>>>> enough to >>>>>>>>> add them to tomcat as a shared library as well. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Scott >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Paul Spencer wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> The current Trinidad demo will not work in a non-J2EE container, >>>>>>>>>> i.e. >>>>>>>>>> Tomcat 6.0, because it does not contain the JSTL jar. Should we >>>>>>>>>> add a >>>>>>>>>> non-J2EE demo to the distribution? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I would say yes because it simplifies the process of getting the >>>>>>>>>> demo >>>>>>>>>> running in an not-J2EE environment. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Paul Spencer >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> > > -- Matthias Wessendorf further stuff: blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org
