On 09/02/2010, at 15:49, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
On Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 6:05 PM, Paul Smith <psm...@aconex.com> wrote:
...
What I propose is then a directory structure change to stargate
hbase/
contrib/
stargate/
web
service (or something)
and move the WEB-INF related stuff into the 'web' area, and move
the java side under 'service'.
Sounds good.
that way we can have 2 artifacts produced, one a jar file
(service), and one a war file (web) automatically.
Can the web depend on the service? The web would bundle under its lib
dir the service jar rather than include all stargate classes under
WEB-INF? I think that'll work.
Absolutely. That's exactly how it will work.
There's also no reason we can't also have a 3rd artifact, say,
'standalone' that is a bundled up version of jetty, with a Main
class that just launches Jetty with the jetty.xml (simple using the
appassembler Maven plugin). Although the confusion from my newbie
HBase side is one AndrewP mentioned about running the stargate bit
through the hbase daemons.sh script. I'm not really sure what that
means, does that farm the stargate stuff out to all datanodes or
something?
No. Run bin/hbase. See how it emits usage. See how one of the
options to bin/hbase is 'rest'. When you do bin/hbase rest, it starts
up a jetty that has the stargate webapp in it.
Will look into that more. That sounds like stargate depends on hbase
and hbase 'might' depend on stargate which is a cyclic dependency (not
good). If the hbase.sh is just a launcher script to start a standalone
process with an embedded jetty+stargate it would seem better for that
script to live with stargate? The maven appassembler plugin will help
automate that I think.
Maybe we can chat further on irc.
Good stuff,
St.Ack
