Hi, > I have been looking a bit into what David Jencks > suggests here. We could indeed write a custom > deployer for Jetspeed. > > 1. Custom JBoss deployer that would ignore jetspeed > configuration files (OJB and Castor for data binding). > 2. Move OJB and Castor files into JETSPEED-INF. This > change could be quickly implemented as the location of > the configuration files location is injected through > spring assembly. > > I believe that 2. is an acceptable solution. What do > others think?
I support moving the configuration files out of META-INF. Though writing a deployer is of course possible, it introduces a strong dependency of Jetspeed on JBoss (I haven't looked into this closely, but it may even be possible that you need the JBoss libraries to compile the custom deployer, so you won't be able to compile Jetspeed without a JBoss installation). Besides, such like APIs are never 100% stable, so maybe we will need a different deployer for JBoss 3.x, 4.x etc. I think that using META-INF for these files is wrong anyway. Despite its generic name, META-INF is a directory with a layout governed by the Java/J2EE specifications and adding your own files there implies always the risk of a conflict. - Michael --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
