I think what u r talking about is the Pluto Portal Driver, remember that Pluto is only a portlet container not a portal server.
Here is what I think, we have our WebAdmin developed usign Portlets/JSP/AJAX - any mix of them - and we can provide different alternatives to users: 1- Have the WebAdmin alone and they install it on any WebContainer which supports these technologies, and we can provide documentational instructions on how to use and setup this WebAdmin on a number of different WebContainers . 2- Have OpenEJB bundled with Tomcat/Jetty - and we are going to use them in the embedded mode only, I don't think we should bundle the whole Tomcat/Jett WebContainers with OpenEJB . On 8/30/07, Karan Malhi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Does pluto work with Jetty (Technically it should work with any > servlet container), but I remember using pluto a year and a half ago > and I saw somewhere that it only worked with tomcat (or maybe a > certain feature worked with only tomcat). > > Do you know of any project which has successfully used Jetty + Pluto. > What is the servlet container container for Geronimo? > > > On 8/30/07, Raj Saini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I think Jetty is the best choice as it is light weight, embeddable and > > very small foot print. ActiveMQ uses that for its web console. > > > > I do not feel bundling tomcat with OpenEJB will be right think to do. > > Admin Console should transparent from user. However, it would be nice to > > provide the standalone web application which users can deploy inside > > their application. For example, I embed ActiveMQ in one of my web > > application. Earlier I was forced to use the embedded Jetty (i.e. > > running a servlet (Jetty) container inside another contain (Tomcat). > > Standalone web application should be deployable in any servlet > container. > > > > Having web admin application as portelts is good idea but it would need > > portal container. Pluto should be the choice (portals.apache.org) as it > > is reference implementation of JSR-168 and comes with minimal baggage. > > > > And I feel JMX is the standard to manage OpenEJB server and deployed > > components. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Raj > > > > Karan Malhi wrote: > > >> 1- Do we have to use JSP or Portlets just because we wan to to use > them, or > > >> we just need to provide good looking dynamic WebAdmin for OpenEJB, we > > >> started to think of the technology before we see what we really need > > >> > > > Thats a good one ;) . I think of it is "there is already something > > > available which can allow you to do a lot more and a lot faster ". So > > > JSF gives me the ability to build GUI rapidly, which is what we need > > > for WebAdming (GUI). Portlets give me layout and common look and feel > > > capabilities and other stuff. Allows me to "drop in" functionality at > > > the correct location without affecting anything else on the page. > > > Something like "Oh, I wish I could configure xyz on the server through > > > web admin, or I wish I could customize the way i look at log files > > > through webadmin" could be created and plugged in independently by a > > > developer. > > > This also allows somebody who just wants to add functionality on > > > their own instance of web admin in a standard way. For example, if i > > > created a cool portlet for my web admin, I can easily plugin into > > > webadmin without knowing anything about the current webadmin > > > framework. Later I realize that my portlet could be useful for the > > > community as a whole, I can simply submit the code to OpenEJB and we > > > can drop it into web admin. > > > > > >> 2- If we really need to use any of these technologies, we can search > for > > >> smaller Engines which provide the main functionality, > > >> > > > I think, For JSP support we could use Jasper to compile jsp's > > > > > > > > >> sure - of Jetty, and we can provide OpenEJB we Jetty only to serve > the > > >> WebAdmin, or we can do as Karan suggested before to have OpenEJB > distro > > >> already bundled with Tomcat and/or Jetty . > > >> > > > Yes, ship the standalone version without webadmin and tomcat version > > > would have webadmin. People can pick and choose the distro depending > > > on what features they need > > > > > >> On 8/30/07, Jacek Laskowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> > > >>> On 8/27/07, David Blevins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >>> > > >>>> Is it possible to support JSF without a full servlet container, jsp > > >>>> enginge, and tag libs support? > > >>>> > > >>> I don't think so. JSF is layered atop JSP so although you might > think > > >>> of JSF with no servlet container (plus JSP) there's no JSF > > >>> implementation I can think of that would run in a servlet container > > >>> with no jsp engine. I'd like to hear I'm mistaken though. It'd be > > >>> great to have a JSF console for openejb. I like the idea. > > >>> > > >>> Jacek > > >>> > > >>> -- > > >>> Jacek Laskowski > > >>> http://www.JacekLaskowski.pl > > >>> > > >>> > > >> > > >> -- > > >> Thanks > > >> - Mohammad Nour > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Karan Singh Malhi > -- Thanks - Mohammad Nour
