Ok. Thank you making the situation clear. 

Best regards,

среда, 12 октября 2016 г., 14:40:12 UTC+3 пользователь Achim Nierbeck 
написал:
>
> sorry didn't want to bother you with my bla-bla-bla ... 
> therefore I have nothing else to say. 
>
> regards, Achim 
>
> 2016-10-12 13:35 GMT+02:00 iJava <pavelka...@gmail.com <javascript:>>:
>
>> Hi Achim
>>
>> Are you there? Will you answer to my suggestion?
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> понедельник, 10 октября 2016 г., 9:07:15 UTC+3 пользователь iJava написал:
>>>
>>> Hi Achim
>>>
>>> Thank you for detailed explanation. However, I think soon google mailing 
>>> list will complain
>>> about our bla-bla-bla because there is still no result.
>>>
>>> Lets get closer to business.
>>> So, I think that web-contextpath musn't be across all connectors because 
>>> it's logically wrong.
>>>
>>> What I suggest after short analysis is:
>>> 1) The solution must be absolute backward compatible with pax-web 6.0. 
>>> (I need this feature
>>> and I can't wait ? time for version 7.0.0)
>>> 2) In deployed bundles there will be an optional(!) Virtual-Hosts 
>>> setting in manifest of war bundle.
>>> I think that even it there is any virtual-host settings separate from 
>>> bundles in the future,
>>>  it is bundle that must say to which virtual host it wants to belong to.
>>> 3) We add virtualHosts collection to org.ops4j.pax.web.service.spi.
>>> model.ServerModel + 
>>> fix all match* methods. Besides we fix match* in 
>>> JettyServerHandlerCollection 
>>> 4) it is necessary to allow war bundles with the same context if the 
>>> have virtual-hosts setting.
>>> I haven't looked yet where it can be done.
>>> 5) The suggested solution is a "first attempt" to see how it will be 
>>> like and will not
>>> require much time (which is the problem #1). If someone has time in 
>>> future he\she can
>>> always make the solution better.
>>>
>>> What will you say? 
>>>
>>> P.S. I considered only for jetty as I wrote above.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> понедельник, 10 октября 2016 г., 0:03:28 UTC+3 пользователь Achim 
>>> Nierbeck написал:
>>>
>>>> I fully understand your problem, but it can't be solved easily. 
>>>> The registration of the Web-ContextPath is per Bundle and over all 
>>>> available Connections, while
>>>> the VirtualHost component only makes sure it's only available to 
>>>> VirtualHost X and the default Connector, while it's not available to 
>>>> VirtualHost Y. 
>>>>
>>>> So for example the following integration Test [1] shows it, the War is 
>>>> registered on the given ContextPath and for the given VirtualHost. The 
>>>> second tests this with the second connector [2]. 
>>>>
>>>> The Web-ContextPath is verified while the WABs are registerd through 
>>>> the web-Extender. [3]
>>>> And there a second WAB with the same Web-ContextPath is put on hold. 
>>>>
>>>> While the VirtualHost is added to the registering Bundle after the 
>>>> Web-ContextPath is registered, the final connection between the Bundle 
>>>> HttpContext (bound to the Bundle Context and therefore also to the 
>>>> WebContext path) is done while registering the HttpContext. 
>>>>
>>>> So what I got from your descriptions you actually require the second 
>>>> part of the jetty virtual host description [7]. 
>>>> This can't be done, as this kind of xml isn't parsed by Pax-Web as it's 
>>>> a mediation layer. 
>>>> In the end you can try to use a vanilla Jetty instead then. 
>>>>
>>>> [1] - 
>>>> https://github.com/ops4j/org.ops4j.pax.web/blob/master/pax-web-itest/pax-web-itest-container/pax-web-itest-container-jetty/src/test/java/org/ops4j/pax/web/itest/jetty/JettyConfigurationExtendedIntegrationTest.java#L66
>>>>
>>>> [2] - 
>>>> https://github.com/ops4j/org.ops4j.pax.web/blob/master/pax-web-itest/pax-web-itest-container/pax-web-itest-container-jetty/src/test/java/org/ops4j/pax/web/itest/jetty/JettyConfigurationExtendedIntegrationTest.java#L106-L111
>>>>
>>>> [3] - 
>>>> https://github.com/ops4j/org.ops4j.pax.web/blob/master/pax-web-extender-war/src/main/java/org/ops4j/pax/web/extender/war/internal/WebObserver.java#L129
>>>>
>>>> [4] - 
>>>> https://github.com/ops4j/org.ops4j.pax.web/blob/master/pax-web-extender-war/src/main/java/org/ops4j/pax/web/extender/war/internal/parser/WebAppParser.java#L797-L807
>>>>
>>>> [5] - 
>>>> https://github.com/ops4j/org.ops4j.pax.web/blob/master/pax-web-runtime/src/main/java/org/ops4j/pax/web/service/internal/HttpServiceStarted.java#L1136-L1166
>>>>
>>>> [6] - 
>>>> https://github.com/ops4j/org.ops4j.pax.web/blob/master/pax-web-runtime/src/main/java/org/ops4j/pax/web/service/internal/HttpServiceStarted.java#L1136-L1166
>>>>
>>>> [7] - 
>>>> https://www.eclipse.org/jetty/documentation/9.3.x/configuring-virtual-hosts.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2016-10-09 19:00 GMT+02:00 Pavel Kastornyy <pavelka...@gmail.com>:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Achim,
>>>>>
>>>>> Please, answer to two questions:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1) What is the use of VirtualHost + Connectors?
>>>>>
>>>>> 2)I need the following: I have pax-web and jetty on port 8080
>>>>> (the port is set via org.osgi.service.http.port). And I have two
>>>>> bundles - A and B with the same web-contextpath: /
>>>>> Bundle A must be linked to example.com, bundle B to
>>>>> foo.example.com. Both bundles must be linked to port 8080.
>>>>> The problem is that if they have the same web-context only
>>>>> the first bundle is started, the servlets in the second are not
>>>>> instantiated. Can this be done via existing code?
>>>>>
>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 09.10.2016 19:40, 'Achim Nierbeck' via OPS4J wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> hmm I'm not sure, maybe we could get rid of one, but when we started 
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> have this feature
>>>>>> jetty required both paramteres. The newer versions of Jetty only 
>>>>>> require
>>>>>> the Web-VirtualHost parameter.
>>>>>> It's in this method [1].
>>>>>> Regarding VirtualHosts and Connectors as far as I'm concerned, it has
>>>>>> already been implemented.
>>>>>> BUT I've never been able to verify it fully as I never tried with 
>>>>>> different
>>>>>> dns names. Only with different ports
>>>>>> on different connectors.
>>>>>> That's the part I documented and blogged about.
>>>>>> Have you tried to verify that this isn't already what you are looking 
>>>>>> for?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> regards, Achim
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [1] -
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://github.com/ops4j/org.ops4j.pax.web/blob/master/pax-web-runtime/src/main/java/org/ops4j/pax/web/service/internal/HttpServiceStarted.java#L1136-L1166
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2016-10-09 11:47 GMT+02:00 iJava <pavelka...@gmail.com>:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't know. If there must be two settings:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Web-Connectors: myConnector
>>>>>>> Web-VirtualHosts: localhost
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> then what is the name of the default connector?
>>>>>>> Because only with Web-VirtualHosts it doesn't work.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I am looking forward to hearing what Achim will say.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> воскресенье, 9 октября 2016 г., 12:31:22 UTC+3 пользователь Niclas 
>>>>>>> Hedhman
>>>>>>> написал:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hold on a sec... Looking at JIRAs and I see;
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://ops4j1.jira.com/browse/PAXWEB-396
>>>>>>>> https://ops4j1.jira.com/browse/PAXWEB-490
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Isn't that exactly the same thing?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Niclas
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Sun, Oct 9, 2016 at 3:34 PM, iJava <pavelka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Niclas, besides look, all current settings are in bundle:
>>>>>>>>> 1) virtual hosts in bundle jetty-web.xml
>>>>>>>>> 2) context-path - in bundle manifest
>>>>>>>>> 3) web.xml - in bundle
>>>>>>>>> So, I suggest to put it there - let all the settings be in one 
>>>>>>>>> place -
>>>>>>>>> in bundle.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> воскресенье, 9 октября 2016 г., 9:26:29 UTC+3 пользователь Niclas
>>>>>>>>> Hedhman написал:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>> I would like to suggest that it is not advisable to put the 
>>>>>>>>>> virtual
>>>>>>>>>> host name into the bundle. That is IMNSHO at odds with the normal
>>>>>>>>>> flexibility available. I think that one way of doing it is through
>>>>>>>>>> configuration of Pax Web, such as an optional map of 
>>>>>>>>>> "Bundle-SymbolicName"
>>>>>>>>>> to "Virtual Host Name". There might be other...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Niclas
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Oct 9, 2016 at 11:03 AM, iJava <pavelka...@gmail.com> 
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hi Achim,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I had some free time (it is 5 am now :) ) to take a look at 
>>>>>>>>>>> pax-web
>>>>>>>>>>> sources.
>>>>>>>>>>> What I suggest after short analysis is:
>>>>>>>>>>> 1) The solution must be absolute backward compatible with 
>>>>>>>>>>> pax-web 6.0.
>>>>>>>>>>> (I need this feature
>>>>>>>>>>> and I can't wait ? time for version 7.0.0)
>>>>>>>>>>> 2) In deployed bundles there will be an optional(!) Virtual-Hosts
>>>>>>>>>>> setting in manifest of war bundle.
>>>>>>>>>>> I think that even it there is any virtual-host settings separate 
>>>>>>>>>>> from
>>>>>>>>>>> bundles in the future,
>>>>>>>>>>>   it is bundle that must say to which virtual host it wants to 
>>>>>>>>>>> belong
>>>>>>>>>>> to.
>>>>>>>>>>> 3) We add virtualHosts collection to 
>>>>>>>>>>> org.ops4j.pax.web.service.spi.model.ServerModel
>>>>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>>>> fix all match* methods. Besides we fix match* in
>>>>>>>>>>> JettyServerHandlerCollection
>>>>>>>>>>> 4) it is necessary to allow war bundles with the same context if 
>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>> have virtual-hosts setting.
>>>>>>>>>>> I haven't looked yet where it can be done.
>>>>>>>>>>> 5) The suggested solution is a "first attempt" to see how it 
>>>>>>>>>>> will be
>>>>>>>>>>> like and will not
>>>>>>>>>>> require much time (which is the problem #1). If someone has time 
>>>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>>> future he\she can
>>>>>>>>>>> always make the solution better.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> What will you say?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> P.S. I considered only for jetty as I wrote above.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> понедельник, 3 октября 2016 г., 21:43:15 UTC+3 пользователь Achim
>>>>>>>>>>> Nierbeck написал:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Niclas ... I have no clue why he isn't shown ... according to
>>>>>>>>>>>> openhub.net he still is [1]
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Pavel, one could also always have 15 Microservices taking care 
>>>>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>>>> those 15 domains.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> regards, Achim
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> [1] - https://www.openhub.net/p/pax-web/users
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2016-10-03 6:54 GMT+02:00 Pavel Kastornyy <pavelka...@gmail.com
>>>>>>>>>>>> >:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Marc
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> You are absolutely right - it is possible to use frontend 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> server
>>>>>>>>>>>>> and use pax-web as backend server. But in this case pax-web
>>>>>>>>>>>>> in any serious production use can be used only as backend +
>>>>>>>>>>>>> if you have 15 domains you will manage 15 ports.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 02.10.2016 21:46, Marc Schlegel wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Here are my two cents
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regarding the whiteboard-extender, I was actually thinking of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> moving this
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> into the webcontainer, because due to the whiteboard-dto spec 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> those
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> two are
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> closely related anyways. My idea was to deprecate the 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (upcoming)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> WhiteboardManager-service right away in order to merge those 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> two
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> modules in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a 7.0 release. So that might solve one pain-point.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But another question is: do we need to rewrite everything in 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> order
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to get a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> feature which might no be needed? Without knowing the 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> business-case
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> behind
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> registering multiple contexts with the same name in different
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> virtual-hosts, I still think that there are much cheaper
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> alternatives:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> everything today moves away from heavy-installations 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (AppServers)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in favor
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of dedicated containers. With OSGi and Pax-Web you can easily 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spawn
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> multiple VMs, and have some proxy/webserver in front which 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> manages
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> site/domain to look like one.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> regards
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Marc
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Am Sonntag, 2. Oktober 2016 15:39:45 UTC+2 schrieb iJava:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Achim
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Could you say (from the top of your head) approximatively 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> how many
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hours
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> may these changes need - 100/1000/5000/10000?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> воскресенье, 2 октября 2016 г., 15:40:23 UTC+3 пользователь 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Achim
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nierbeck
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> написал:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sounds like a good and interesting idea ...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Right now only from the top of my head:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Pax-Web Runtime and therefore the different 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Implementations
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> aren't
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> made for this right now. So this would need a complete 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rewrite of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> how we're
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> handling it. Another point would be how would web and 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> white-board
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> extender
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> work with it. We could think about wiring those two closer 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> core.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Never the less an application deploying servlets will 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> always need
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to add
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the virtual host environment, working with defaults could 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> take
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> care of that.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We could consider to start this with a complete rewrite of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Pax-Web and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> therefore aim for a 7.0.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    BUT ... I fear I won't have enough time to takle this.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Considering the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> amount of time I spent in the past and about what it would 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> take
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to have all
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the functionalities of Pax-Web re-written, and especially 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with my
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> $dayJob +
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Family.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> regards, Achim
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2016-10-02 5:35 GMT+02:00 Niclas Hedhman <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nic...@hedhman.org>:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Honestly, if this is to be fixed, I think Pax Web should 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> support
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Managed
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Service Factory, and instantiate separate virtual host 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> services
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> according
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to a provided configuration. That configuration should 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> contain
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> which WAB(s)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> goes into that virtual host, together with any other 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> virtual host
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> configuration.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To me, that seems to be the right solution forward, 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintains
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> OSGi
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> compatibility, doesn't introduce new config args on WABs 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> doesn't treat
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "one domain" different than another.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think the tricky bit is to make the default case and the 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> MSF
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> instantiations play nicely with each other, but that is an 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> design
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> implementation detail at this stage.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Niclas
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, Oct 1, 2016 at 4:49 PM, iJava <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pavelka...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I analyzed situation again and I am sure I am right. How I
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> explain this
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - if *only*
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> web-contextpath is used then all war bundles (wabs) are 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> inside
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> one
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> domain.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obvious if you need more then one domains (virtualhosts) 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> limitation is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> unpleasant. So I am sure that when bundle is deployed it 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> must
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *two*
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> settings:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     Layer one - virtualhosts (plural)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     Layer two - web-contextpath.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In this case the deployer has all the advantages. He can 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> create
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> N sites
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And inside every virtualhost he can make N contexts if he 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> needs.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I am sure that this functionality must be developed. 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Pax-web is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> great
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> product
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and with such functionality it will have all main 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> functionality
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good web server.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would be glad to hear others opinion about such New 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Feature.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> пятница, 30 сентября 2016 г., 18:14:33 UTC+3 пользователь 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> iJava
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> написал:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ok Achim.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I understood the situation. You know the architecture of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pax-web well.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Could you say - how difficult
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it can be to make some extender (plugin etc) to link 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wabs not
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> web-contextpath but to virtualhosts
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and to make them all work with one port like it is in 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> usual web
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> servers (for example apache).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please, note I don't care about specification - I care 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> about
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> normal
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> work.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> пятница, 30 сентября 2016 г., 18:06:23 UTC+3 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> пользователь Achim
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nierbeck написал:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I never said Pax-Web is a complete replacement for 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GlassFish,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it's a WebContainer for OSGi environments, which 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fulfills the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> OSGi
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spec.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It uses Jetty, Undertow or Tomcat to do so. AND it 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gives you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> most of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the benefits of those underlying servers in the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> same way. If you're not satisfied because you expect 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> something
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> different. I'm sorry to hear
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but nothing we can do about.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> regards, Achim
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2016-09-30 17:04 GMT+02:00 Achim Nierbeck <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bcan...@googlemail.com>:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Well, in that case try to use GlassFish again.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GlassFish uses a complete different strategy.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards, Achim
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2016-09-30 17:02 GMT+02:00 iJava <pavelka...@gmail.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Something is wrong here. I worked with glassfish. 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Everything
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> starts
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with glassfish domain.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In one domain you usually have one http connector and 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> one
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> connector. After that in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> one domain you can have multiple virtual hosts. When 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> deploy
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> osgi bundle you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in manifest have Web-ContextPath and VirtualServers. 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have N sites
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (example.com, boo.org, blablabla.net) with 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> WebContextPath
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> / and it
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is not necessary
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    to create new connectors for new ports.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I know it well, because I remember it took me some 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> time to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make it
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> work.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And I was very glad because it is easy to work with 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> one
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> port then
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with N.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Now you suggest me to go back and again work with N 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ports.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I am
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shocked and killed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> пятница, 30 сентября 2016 г., 17:49:30 UTC+3 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> пользователь
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Achim
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nierbeck написал:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> yes, you can only have one Web-ContextPath per WAB. 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "/" is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> especially tricky since you can also have HttpService
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> servlets listening on
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that one.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> regards, Achim
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2016-09-30 16:46 GMT+02:00 iJava <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pavelka...@gmail.com>:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Achim
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you for the links, I wil study them now. So, 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> do I
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> understand it right -
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> accroding to specs I can have only one bundle with
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> web-contextpath / for one port ?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> пятница, 30 сентября 2016 г., 17:37:55 UTC+3 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> пользователь
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Achim
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nierbeck написал:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's in the spec ...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Now, if you want to run virtual hosts, take a look 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the links
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> below.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> regards, Achim
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [1] -
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/ops4j/org.o
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ps4j.pax.web/blob/master/pax-w
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> eb-itest/pax-web-itest-contain
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> er/pax-web-itest-container-
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jetty/src/test/java/org/ops4j/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pax/web/itest/jetty/JettyConfi
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gurationExtendedIntegrationTest.java
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [2] -
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/ops4j/org.o
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ps4j.pax.web/blob/master/pax-w
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> eb-itest/pax-web-itest-contain
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> er/pax-web-itest-container-
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jetty/src/test/java/org/ops4j/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pax/web/itest/jetty/JettyConfi
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gurationExtendedTwoIntegrationTest.java
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [3] -
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://notizblog.nierbeck.de/2
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 013/01/bind-certain-web-applic
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ations-to-specific-httpconnectors/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2016-09-30 16:23 GMT+02:00 Pavel Kastornyy <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pavelka...@gmail.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> :
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Achim, I understand you, but why? If the domains 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> different
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> why must I change web-contextpath? For example, 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lets
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> suppose
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I have five different sites on one osgi and for 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> every
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> site I
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> separate wab (which is logical) and every wab has 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> only
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> one
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> context
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - /. It is normal situation - take a look at any 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> web
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> server.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 30.09.2016 17:19, 'Achim Nierbeck' via OPS4J 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Manifest entry Web-ContextPath is the one in 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> charge
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> where the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> application resides in.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So in that case you need to make sure of 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> different
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Web-ContextPaths.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> regards, Achim
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2016-09-30 16:09 GMT+02:00 iJava <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pavelka...@gmail.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> :
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Achim,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, you are right. The same web-contextpath in 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> both
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bundles:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> /
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But it seems to be a bug because in bundle A I 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jetty-web.xml
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <Configure
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> class="org.eclipse.jetty.servl
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> et.ServletContextHandler">
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>        <Set name="virtualHosts">
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>            <Array type="java.lang.String">
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>              <Item>example.com</Item>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>              <Item>www.example.com</Item>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>            </Array>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>        </Set>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> </Configure>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and in bundle B I have jetty-web.xml
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <Configure
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> class="org.eclipse.jetty.servl
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> et.ServletContextHandler">
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>        <Set name="virtualHosts">
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>            <Array type="java.lang.String">
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>              <Item>foo.example.com</Item>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>              <Item>www.foo.example.com</Item>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>            </Array>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>        </Set>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> </Configure>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> пятница, 30 сентября 2016 г., 16:54:24 UTC+3
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> пользователь
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Achim Nierbeck
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> написал:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this seems to be a rather strange bug. Do both 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the war
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maybe have the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> same web-contextpath?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> regards, Achim
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2016-09-30 14:09 GMT+02:00 iJava <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pavelka...@gmail.com>:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi all
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It may seem to be funny question but I have the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> following
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> situation. I
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have two war bundles A and B.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> When I start and install only bundle A - it 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> works
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ok. When
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I start and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> install only bundle B it works ok.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> When I try to install both of them always 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> only the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> first
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> works. The
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> servlet in the second bundle is not
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> instantiated. I tried to add
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <load-on-startup>0</load-on-startup> to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> servlet config
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in web.xml but it didn't help.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any ideas? Does anyone try to deploy more 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> then one
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> war
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bundle on the same
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> osgi framework with pax-web 6.0?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ------------------
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> OPS4J - <a href="http:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- 
>> -- 
>> ------------------
>> OPS4J - http://www.ops4j.org - op...@googlegroups.com <javascript:>
>>
>> --- 
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
>> "OPS4J" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
>> email to ops4j+un...@googlegroups.com <javascript:>.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
>
>
>
> -- 
>
> Apache Member
> Apache Karaf <http://karaf.apache.org/> Committer & PMC
> OPS4J Pax Web <http://wiki.ops4j.org/display/paxweb/Pax+Web/> Committer & 
> Project Lead
> blog <http://notizblog.nierbeck.de/>
> Co-Author of Apache Karaf Cookbook <http://bit.ly/1ps9rkS>
>
> Software Architect / Project Manager / Scrum Master 
>
>

-- 
-- 
------------------
OPS4J - http://www.ops4j.org - ops4j@googlegroups.com

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"OPS4J" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to ops4j+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to