I understand that, though I think that there might be a misunderstanding in general...
My goal is to change GlassFish so that anyone with a Merb application can say "asadmin deploy /path/to/my/merb/app" and have GlassFish successfully deploy that Merb app. It seems like writing the Rack adapter, since it would be a component that would live outside of GlassFish, would defeat that (since anyone wanting to deploy on GlassFish would need to also get the adapter). Please correct me if I'm wrong about that, though. On Oct 8, 11:13 am, "Michael Klishin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 2008/10/8 [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > It seems like > > what I'm trying to do would be to replace Rack with GlassFish, rather > > than route GlassFish through Rack. > > Rack is just an interface between web framework and web server. It has > dead simple interface > and acts as a glue. People can use it with any application out there. > This is how Passenger runs Merb, Halcyon and other applications, using > simple Rack adapter that takes environment from Apache. > -- > MK --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "merb" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/merb?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
