Of course: I never said that it is easy ;)

It will take us some time, see the discussion about HierarchicScannerService 
and HierarchicBeanManager over in OWB.
We need to discuss/test this pattern and might extend it to OpenEJB as well.


LieGrue,
strub



----- Original Message -----
> From: Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]>
> To: Mark Struberg <[email protected]>; [email protected]
> Cc: 
> Sent: Sunday, April 22, 2012 3:32 PM
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] OpenEJB 4.0.0/TomEE 1.0.0 (staging-068)
> 
> Yep
> Le 22 avr. 2012 14:58, "Mark Struberg" <[email protected]> a 
> écrit :
> 
>>  To get this clear: ClassLoaderIsolation between WebApps is a MUST.
>> 
>>  And there are ways to do that properly.
>> 
>>  LieGrue,
>>  strub
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>  >________________________________
>>  > From: Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]>
>>  >To: Mark Struberg <[email protected]>; [email protected]
>>  >Sent: Sunday, April 22, 2012 2:15 PM
>>  >Subject: Re: [VOTE] OpenEJB 4.0.0/TomEE 1.0.0 (staging-068)
>>  >
>>  >
>>  >Yep but that's a pain for openejb integration and im not sure it is
>>  logical either.
>>  >- Romain
>>  >Le 22 avr. 2012 13:38, "Mark Struberg" 
> <[email protected]> a écrit :
>>  >
>>  >I use the catalina.properties shared.loader to provide a sane EE6
>>  ClassLoader hierarchy. Where each WebApp gets an own WebAppClassLoader
>>  which share a common ClassLoader for the ear-libs.
>>  >>
>>  >>Having an EAR without ClassLoader isolation between the WebApps is 
> just
>>  not working for most apps, and tomcats shared.loader feature served us well
>>  so far.
>>  >>
>>  >>LieGrue,
>>  >>strub
>>  >>
>>  >>
>>  >>
>>  >>----- Original Message -----
>>  >>> From: Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]>
>>  >>> To: [email protected]
>>  >>> Cc:
>>  >>> Sent: Sunday, April 22, 2012 1:08 PM
>>  >>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] OpenEJB 4.0.0/TomEE 1.0.0 (staging-068)
>>  >>>
>>  >>> Catalina.properties was fine but not as easy for users to 
> understand
>>  as the
>>  >>> trick you did (yes was close to what i thought) so a big +1 
> for it.
>>  >>>
>>  >>> - Romain
>>  >>> Le 22 avr. 2012 10:50, "David Blevins" 
> <[email protected]>
>>  >>> a écrit :
>>  >>>
>>  >>>>
>>  >>>>  On Apr 22, 2012, at 1:27 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
>>  >>>>
>>  >>>>  > We simply need both like we already do for endorsed 
> lib! We keep
>>  the
>>  >>>>  webapp
>>  >>>>  > as it and we create a webapp for tomee which doesnt 
> contain it.
>>  Having
>>  >>>>  jars
>>  >>>>  > in tomcat/lib is clearly what we.want for tomee but 
> we need to keep
>>  >>> the
>>  >>>>  > drop in war webapp.
>>  >>>>  >
>>  >>>>  > Just a build trick as we already have for some other 
> things.
>>  >>>>
>>  >>>>  Great minds think alike, that's exactly how I did it 
> -- if I
>>  understand
>>  >>>>  correctly.
>>  >>>>
>>  >>>>  The webapp still has all the libs -- there weren't 
> any changes to the
>>  >>>>  webapp structure.  I just added one slightly altered 
> install method
>>  in the
>>  >>>>  Installer which is only called from
>>  >>>>  tomee/apache-tomee/...SetupCommand.groovy.  The extra 
> method just
>>  copies
>>  >>>>  the libs from one dir to the next and uses a different 
> Listener.
>>  >>>>
>>  >>>>  So there's no change for Tomcat with added tomee.war 
> and the install
>>  >>>>  process of the webapp.
>>  >>>>
>>  >>>>  Just when we make the all-in-one TomEE bundle, the libs 
> are moved to
>>  >>>>  tomcat/lib/.
>>  >>>>
>>  >>>>  Important note is that there is no real runtime change.  
> The webapp
>>  was
>>  >>>>  adding libraries programmatically to tomcat/lib/.  So 
> this change is
>>  >>>>  effectively just cutting that step out.  It sounds from 
> Mark's
>>  comment
>>  >>> that
>>  >>>>  the catalina.properties involves creating a different 
> classloader.
>>  If
>>  >>>>  that's the case that's a very different thing.  
> We'd have to
>>  >>> rework the
>>  >>>>  integration at a fundamental level -- which is of course 
> ok, just not
>>  >>> quick.
>>  >>>>
>>  >>>>
>>  >>>>  -David
>>  >>>>
>>  >>>>  > Le 22 avr. 2012 10:16, "Mark Struberg"
>>  >>> <[email protected]> a écrit :
>>  >>>>  >
>>  >>>>  >> Yes, catalina.properties 
> "shared.loader" is the magic
>>  >>> property to give
>>  >>>>  you
>>  >>>>  >> an additional classloader hierarchy. But I 
> havent tested what
>>  >>> happens
>>  >>>>  with
>>  >>>>  >> the additional EAR you create. Also please note 
> that for a
>>  >>> 'big' iron,
>>  >>>>  you
>>  >>>>  >> would need a way to exchange JPA and JSF 
> implementations on a per
>>  >>> EAR or
>>  >>>>  >> even per WebApp basis. If we deliberately left 
> this out, then it
>>  >>> is much
>>  >>>>  >> easier. That's the standard use case 
> anyway...
>>  >>>>  >>
>>  >>>>  >>
>>  >>>>  >> For the next release candidates, could you 
> please roll a -rc1, rc2
>>  >>> etc?
>>  >>>>  >> Doing a 1.0.0 over and over is not very maven 
> friendly in case we
>>  >>> like
>>  >>>>  to
>>  >>>>  >> do a few tricks.
>>  >>>>  >>
>>  >>>>  >> LieGrue,
>>  >>>>  >> strub
>>  >>>>  >>
>>  >>>>  >>
>>  >>>>  >>
>>  >>>>  >> ----- Original Message -----
>>  >>>>  >>> From: Jean-Louis MONTEIRO 
> <[email protected]>
>>  >>>>  >>> To: [email protected]
>>  >>>>  >>> Cc:
>>  >>>>  >>> Sent: Sunday, April 22, 2012 9:19 AM
>>  >>>>  >>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] OpenEJB 4.0.0/TomEE 
> 1.0.0 (staging-068)
>>  >>>>  >>>
>>  >>>>  >>> I don't really like to put all together. 
> May be just
>>  >>> adding a line to
>>  >>>>  the
>>  >>>>  >>> catalina.properties would have done the 
> trick. That's how
>>  >>> we've more or
>>  >>>>  >>> less proceeded until now to share the same 
> tomcat binaries
>>  >>> between
>>  >>>>  >>> application instances.
>>  >>>>  >>>
>>  >>>>  >>> Jlouis
>>  >>>>  >>> Le 22 avr. 2012 09:14, "David 
> Blevins"
>>  >>> <[email protected]>
>>  >>>>  >>> a écrit :
>>  >>>>  >>>
>>  >>>>  >>>>
>>  >>>>  >>>> On Apr 21, 2012, at 10:51 PM, Jean-Louis 
> MONTEIRO wrote:
>>  >>>>  >>>>
>>  >>>>  >>>>> David,
>>  >>>>  >>>>>
>>  >>>>  >>>>> Does it mean that the tomee webapp 
> is no more there or
>>  >>> just that
>>  >>>>  >>>> tomee/lib
>>  >>>>  >>>>> shifted to tomcat/lib?
>>  >>>>  >>>>
>>  >>>>  >>>> That webapps/tomee/lib shifted to 
> tomcat/lib
>>  >>>>  >>>>
>>  >>>>  >>>> No other change to the integration.
>>  >>>>  >>>>
>>  >>>>  >>>>
>>  >>>>  >>>> -David
>>  >>>>  >>>>
>>  >>>>  >>>>
>>  >>>>  >>>>>
>>  >>>>  >>>>> Jean Louis
>>  >>>>  >>>>> Le 22 avr. 2012 04:28, "David 
> Blevins"
>>  >>>>  >>> <[email protected]> a
>>  >>>>  >>>> écrit :
>>  >>>>  >>>>>
>>  >>>>  >>>>>> Another -1 to add to the list.  
> Attempted to get
>>  >>> TomEE working
>>  >>>>  >>> with the
>>  >>>>  >>>>>> Eclipse WTP Tomcat plugin and 
> found it near
>>  >>> impossible.
>>  >>>>  >>>>>>
>>  >>>>  >>>>>> I did all the things you 
> shouldn't do (i.e. I
>>  >>> did it the most
>>  >>>>  >>> intuitive
>>  >>>>  >>>>>> way which doesn't work).  
> Once I got it
>>  >>> working it was a bit
>>  >>>>  >>> slow.
>>  >>>>  >>>>  Then I
>>  >>>>  >>>>>> noticed I couldn't develop 
> any Java EE stuff
>>  >>> because the APIs
>>  >>>>  >>> weren't in
>>  >>>>  >>>>>> the project.
>>  >>>>  >>>>>>
>>  >>>>  >>>>>> I figured out how the plugin 
> thinks and fixed all
>>  >>> that.  Long
>>  >>>>  >>> story
>>  >>>>  >>>> short,
>>  >>>>  >>>>>> you just need to put the 
> server's libs in
>>  >>>>  >>> <tomcat>/lib/.  Did that as
>>  >>>>  >>>>>> TOMEE-163.
>>  >>>>  >>>>>>
>>  >>>>  >>>>>> Once that is done you get 
> several benefits:
>>  >>>>  >>>>>> - Nothing special to do or avoid 
> to get the Tomcat
>>  >>> plugin to work
>>  >>>>  >>>>>>   - All the modes work fine
>>  >>>>  >>>>>> - You can develop JavaEE apps 
> without having to do
>>  >>> any special
>>  >>>>  >>> setup
>>  >>>>  >>>> (the
>>  >>>>  >>>>>> right libs will be in your 
> project)
>>  >>>>  >>>>>> - Much faster.  Server start was 
> up over 10s now
>>  >>> is just 2s.  Much
>>  >>>>  >>> more
>>  >>>>  >>>>>> fun to work with this tool.
>>  >>>>  >>>>>>
>>  >>>>  >>>>>> Eclipse support went from 
> frustrating and tedious
>>  >>> to fun and
>>  >>>>  >>> simple.
>>  >>>>  >>>>>>
>>  >>>>  >>>>>>
>>  >>>>  >>>>>> -David
>>  >>>>  >>>>>>
>>  >>>>  >>>>>>
>>  >>>>  >>>>>> On Apr 17, 2012, at 10:02 PM, 
> David Blevins wrote:
>>  >>>>  >>>>>>
>>  >>>>  >>>>>>> Looks like the links were 
> not quite right :)
>>  >>> Need update the
>>  >>>>  >>> template.
>>  >>>>  >>>>>> Here is what it should have 
> listed:
>>  >>>>  >>>>>>>
>>  >>>>  >>>>>>> SVN Tag:
>>  >>>>  >>>>>>>
>>  >>>>  >>>>>>>
>>  >>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openejb/tags/openejb-4.0.0/
>>  >>>>  >>>>>>>
>>  >>>>  >>>>>>> Maven Repo:
>>  >>>>  >>>>>>>
>>  >>>>  >>>>>>>
>>  >>>>  >>>>
>>  >>>>  >>
>>  >>>
>>  https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopenejb-068
>>  >>>>  >>>>>>>
>>  >>>>  >>>>>>> Binaries & Source:
>>  >>>>  >>>>>>>
>>  >>>>  >>>>>>>
>>  >>> http://people.apache.org/~dblevins/staging-068/openejb-4.0.0/
>>  >>>>  >>>>>>>
>>  >>>>  >>>>>>> Legal:
>>  >>>>  >>>>>>>
>>  >>>>  >>>>>>>
>>  >>>>  >>>
>>  >>> 
> http://people.apache.org/~dblevins/staging-068/legal/archives.html
>>  >>>>  >>>>>>>
>>  >>>>  >>>>>>>
>>  >>>>  >>>>>>>
>>  >>>>  >>>>>>> -David
>>  >>>>  >>>>>>>
>>  >>>>  >>>>>>
>>  >>>>  >>>>>>
>>  >>>>  >>>>
>>  >>>>  >>>>
>>  >>>>  >>>
>>  >>>>  >>
>>  >>>>
>>  >>>>
>>  >>>
>>  >>
>>  >
>>  >
>> 
>

Reply via email to