On 2001.11.22 02:34:39 -0500 Jason Dillon wrote:
> This makes alot of sence, would it be hard to augment the deployer in
> such a
> fashion as to make the window smaller?
>
> --jason
I think offhand this would not be so easy. I think (without having
checked) that what takes the most time is co
This makes alot of sence, would it be hard to augment the deployer in such a
fashion as to make the window smaller?
--jason
> What I would really like, is to see that a redeploy needs to happen, and have
> the new file extracted into a new directory first, THEN have the old version
> undeploye
On Wed, 21 Nov 2001, David Jencks wrote:
> On 2001.11.21 14:06:58 -0500 danch wrote:
> >
> >
> > Rickard Öberg wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > That's much better, assuming I know where the tmp directory is. And I
> > > don't, since the name keeps changing for each deployment. :-(
> >
> >
> > Something peo
On 2001.11.21 14:06:58 -0500 danch wrote:
>
>
> Rickard Öberg wrote:
>
> >
> > That's much better, assuming I know where the tmp directory is. And I
> > don't, since the name keeps changing for each deployment. :-(
>
>
> Something people have been compaining about roughly forever.
I think
On Wed, 21 Nov 2001, Rickard [ISO-8859-1] Öberg wrote:
> What I want to avoid is the copying and packaging that goes on. Do you
> have any idea of the time it takes to package 1500 JSP's into a JAR, and
> then have that 3-4Mb file copied and exploded into a tmp dir, and this
> for every time you
Bill Burke wrote:
> In our app, we don't use wars and ears, only jars for our EJBs. Our jsps
> run off of a directory exposed through Jetty. That way we can easily modify
> jsps on the fly. Can't see why anybody would use WARS and EARS unless you
> were shipping a product.
I've worked in a
Rickard Öberg wrote:
>
> That's much better, assuming I know where the tmp directory is. And I
> don't, since the name keeps changing for each deployment. :-(
Something people have been compaining about roughly forever.
___
Jboss-development m
> -Original Message-
> From: marc fleury [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2001 1:50 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Luke Taylor;
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] Developing with JBoss
>
>
> |In our app, we don't use
ing" lover of 3 days ago ?
;=)
marcf
|
|> -Original Message-
|> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Luke
|> Taylor
|> Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2001 12:59 PM
|> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|> Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] Developing wi
|I remember now raising the same sort of issue during the JBoss training
|in London. I always end up running a separate web container during
Yes I remember,
|development because the turnaround of redeploying due to minor jsp
|changes is just too frustrating.
|
|It's not just about the time for t
David Jencks wrote:
>>Could work, but I'd rather do something portable. Plus, it's non-trivial
>>to break up our app (it's rather monolithic). Plus, several EAR's ->
>>several web deployments -> several web contexts -> no session sharing ->
>>no good.
>>
>
> You're talking about a non-portabl
gt; From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Luke
> Taylor
> Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2001 12:59 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] Developing with JBoss
>
>
> Andrew Scherpbier wrote:
>
> > Rickard Öberg wrote:
>
Luke Taylor wrote:
> It's not just about the time for the deployment, which is minimal - if
> you're working on frontend stuff and just essentially modifying web
> pages, then you lose your whole session state. If you have a complicated
> web application with security, shopping carts etc, and
Andrew Scherpbier wrote:
> Rickard Öberg wrote:
>
>> David Jencks wrote:
>>
>>> How would this help in the least? My understanding is that if you use a
>>> directory, the dd is checked for time changes
>>
>>
>> For the auto-deployer, yes. I think I'd actually prefer to not use the
>> au
Rickard Öberg wrote:
> David Jencks wrote:
>
>> How would this help in the least? My understanding is that if you use a
>> directory, the dd is checked for time changes
>
>
>
> For the auto-deployer, yes. I think I'd actually prefer to not use the
> auto-deployer, and instead make an Ant task t
On 2001.11.21 11:53:03 -0500 Rickard Öberg wrote:
> David Jencks wrote:
>
> > How would this help in the least? My understanding is that if you use a
> > directory, the dd is checked for time changes
>
>
> For the auto-deployer, yes. I think I'd actually prefer to not use the
> auto-deployer,
David Jencks wrote:
> How would this help in the least? My understanding is that if you use a
> directory, the dd is checked for time changes
For the auto-deployer, yes. I think I'd actually prefer to not use the
auto-deployer, and instead make an Ant task that does the deploy command
explic
How would this help in the least? My understanding is that if you use a
directory, the dd is checked for time changes and if it changes the whole
app is undeployed and redeployed. Unless you can put your app in
independently deployable chunks, you will need to undeploy and redeploy the
entire app
18 matches
Mail list logo
