Interesting. I am not aware if anyone separating the common container from Shindig. Usual practice is that applications in general are gadgets and you will deploy Shindig and Gadgets in separate servers. Shindig server could host entry point with bootstrap of common container, and gadgets coming from various servers. Your app on the client side will be isolated into an iframe.
>From your note its not clear what kind of an app you are referring. Thanks and regards Kris Vishwanathan, PMP IBM Certified IT Architect The Open Group Master Certified IT Architect IBM Software Group, WPLC Ph: 919 543 1081 (T/L: 441-1081) Ph; 877-316-0046 (T/L: 349-4847) Cell: 919 830 2890 If I had one hour to save the world I would spend fifty-five minutes defining the problem and only five minutes finding the solution - Albert Einstein |------------> | From: | |------------> >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| |daviesd <[email protected]> | >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| |------------> | To: | |------------> >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| |<[email protected]> | >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| |------------> | Date: | |------------> >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| |03/28/2011 04:45 PM | >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| |------------> | Subject: | |------------> >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| |Re: Root webapp??? | >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| So let me ask a followup question. I WAS running the shindig-server component and the container javascript all on the same host under a /shindig web context. I had all that working just fine. Now I'm trying to split out the server and client side pieces so that, as suggested, I don't have the security risk of shindig running on the same server as my webapp. So I took my existing project and deployed it to another host/domain. Then I took the commoncontainer javascript and included it in a new webapp on my localhost and pointed the configuration to my new host. in assembler.js: testConfig[shindig.container.ServiceConfig.API_PATH] = 'http://newhost:8080/shindig/rpc'; In index.html: <script type="text/javascript" src=" http://newhost:8080/shindig/gadgets/js/container:rpc:pubsub-2.js?c=1&de bug=1&container=default""></script> Now I hit http://localhost:8080/shindig-client/commoncontainer/ And I get an error http://localhost:8080/shindig/rpc?st=-1%3A-1%3A*%3A%3A*%3A0%3Adefault&%5B%7B %22method%22%3A%22gadgets.metadata%22%2C%22id%22%3A%22gadgets.metadata%22%2C %22params%22%3A%7B%22container%22%3A%22default%22%2C%22ids%22%3A%5B%22http%3 A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2Fig%2Fmodules%2Fhoroscope.xml%22%2C%22http%3A%2F%2Fww w.labpixies.com%2Fcampaigns%2Ftodo%2Ftodo.xml%22%5D%2C%22fields%22%3A%5B%22i frameUrl%22%2C%22modulePrefs.*%22%2C%22needsTokenRefresh%22%2C%22userPrefs.* %22%2C%22views.preferredHeight%22%2C%22views.preferredWidth%22%2C%22expireTi meMs%22%2C%22responseTimeMs%22%5D%2C%22userId%22%3A%22%40viewer%22%2C%22grou pId%22%3A%22%40self%22%7D%7D%5D= 404 not found, because it's going to localhost instead of newhost. What am I doing wrong here? Am I understanding this correctly? That all the shindig server stuff can be on 1 host and my commoncontainer can be on another? Thanks, doug On 3/28/11 10:39 AM, "Kris Vishwanathan" <[email protected]> wrote: > This is right on time. We had similar issues with context root and host > port settings. We have developed a patch based on trunk and will be posting > for code review in a day or two. > >
