I don't know if this is typical, but I typically deploy my apps in an EAR, in which case you just add another "EAR Build" module that packages up the Persistence module as an EJB module (v3) and then adds the WAR(s). It requires that you make some slight changes to the POM for the Persistence module (change packaging to ejb), but otherwise it's a simple change. Otherwise, you can just deploy the JPA module jar and webapp modules separately. To answer your question, I think that you should be able to just duplicate the existing project, although I think that you should be able to handle enforcing login and SSL via SiteMap for just the portions you want to protect.
Derek On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 12:41 AM, Charles F. Munat <c...@munat.com> wrote: > > Hmmm. This brings up something I've been meaning to ask about. > > I have a public JPA app which has a log-in only maintenance area. I'm > thinking about moving the maintenance part to a subdomain and serving it > via SSL. > > I think it would be easier to pull out a separate sub-project, so I > might have the persistance sub-project, the public sub-project, and the > admin-subproject. > > Is this a good idea? And is it just as easy as copying the current > webapp subproject, renaming it, and then deleting the parts that don't > belong in each of the public and admin sub-projects? > > But then how would I package it? How would I deploy it? > > Has anyone done anything like this? > > Chas. > > Timothy Perrett wrote: > > I 100% see why you want a seperate module for persistance, but > > workflow wise I've found JPA a lot more productive if it's in the lift > > app as it means you don't have to keep deploying the JAR into your > > local repo. > > > > Perhaps > > > > lift-jpa-archetype-blank-split > > lift-jpa-archetype-blank-consolidated > > > > > > Thoughts? > > > > Tim > > > > > > On Apr 2, 7:33 am, Derek Chen-Becker <dchenbec...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I thought I had sent out an email on the list earlier asking what people > >> would want to see in such an archetype. As a base, probably a master POM > >> with a module for the persistence unit and a module for the Lift side of > >> things. The persistence unit could have a skeleton persistence.xml in > the > >> right place but otherwise be empty. The Lift side could have the basic > Boot > >> and perhaps a Model class set up with a placeholder persistence setup. > >> Thoughts? > >> > >> Derek > >> > >> On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 3:16 PM, Timothy Perrett <timo...@getintheloop.eu > >wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >>> Glad im not the only one ;-) > >>> On Apr 1, 11:15 pm, Viktor Klang <viktor.kl...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> Timmy, > >>>> yeah, I can see that coming in handy. > >>>> Cheers, > >>>> Viktor > >>>> On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 11:13 PM, Tim Perrett <timo...@getintheloop.eu > >>>> wrote: > >>>>> Guys, > >>>>> Do people see room for a blank JPA archetype just like we have blank > >>>>> and basic of normal lift archetypes? > >>>>> IMO, whilst its great having the basic one for learning and examples, > >>>>> having something thats a workable starting point without having to > >>>>> remove code etc would be helpful. > >>>>> I appreciate this is a bit lazy - but i don't think it would take > much > >>>>> work and would provide a neat solution > >>>>> Thoughts? > >>>>> Tim > >>>> -- > >>>> Viktor Klang > >>>> Senior Systems Analyst > > > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lift" group. To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to liftweb+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
