Re: [JBoss-dev] We need more configurations in the distribution
I have this working... running testsuite now. This was a little bit trickier than I had first thought. The tricky bit is how do you specify a URL to load resources off net and still let local directories exist under the same namespace. There is no clean seperation of what can be net and what must be local based on this structure... but I think I have solved that. The primary difference is that there is a HomeDir and a ServerHomeDir, where the first would refer to the parent directory of bin/ (like it did before) and ServerHomeDir is the directory w/ServerName (from ConfigName) appened, so server/default. To make the url bit work there is a HomeURL (from InstallURL) and a ServerHomeURL, which default to there directory counterparts. Then config bits that are URL based use the URL versions for defaults and Dir versions for File. I am leaving the command line options the same in Main for now, --net-boot and --configuration should still do the right thing. I left in deprecated getInstallURL, getConfigURL, getDataDir and getTempDir which return the correct value for now until I can switch things over all the way. I implemeted the config backend for LibraryURL and ServerLibraryURL, but nothing uses ServerLibraryURL at the moment. There is also a issue with MainDeployer with what it uses for the base of relative files. It current still uses HomeDir for this, cause I think that might be needed for codebase elements, but not too sure. Should straighten this out. In the mean time, I am using an eplicit URL for deploy/, which uses the ServerHomeURL. Testsuite runs fine... shall I commit this? --jason Scott M Stark wrote: No, he thought David's idea of moving everything to deploy was a bad idea. The suggestion from Hiram was: jboss/ jboss/bin/ jboss/lib/ jboss/client/ jboss/servers/default jboss/servers/default/conf jboss/servers/default/tmp jboss/servers/default/db jboss/servers/default/deploy jboss/servers/minimal jboss/servers/minimal/conf jboss/servers/minimal/tmp jboss/servers/minimal/db jboss/servers/minimal/deploy etc. Scott Stark Chief Technology Officer JBoss Group, LLC - Original Message - From: Bill Burke [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Scott M Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 25, 2002 3:28 PM Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] We need more configurations in the distribution I thought Marc nixed this idea -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Scott M Stark Sent: Monday, February 25, 2002 6:29 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] We need more configurations in the distribution That is fine with me. ___ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development ___ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
Re: [JBoss-dev] We need more configurations in the distribution
If run.bat and run.sh work as before for the default file based build/output and the testsuite runs then check it in. Scott Stark Chief Technology Officer JBoss Group, LLC - Original Message - From: Jason Dillon [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Scott M Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2002 12:37 AM Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] We need more configurations in the distribution I have this working... running testsuite now. This was a little bit trickier than I had first thought. The tricky bit is how do you specify a URL to load resources off net and still let local directories exist under the same namespace. There is no clean seperation of what can be net and what must be local based on this structure... but I think I have solved that. The primary difference is that there is a HomeDir and a ServerHomeDir, where the first would refer to the parent directory of bin/ (like it did before) and ServerHomeDir is the directory w/ServerName (from ConfigName) appened, so server/default. To make the url bit work there is a HomeURL (from InstallURL) and a ServerHomeURL, which default to there directory counterparts. Then config bits that are URL based use the URL versions for defaults and Dir versions for File. I am leaving the command line options the same in Main for now, --net-boot and --configuration should still do the right thing. I left in deprecated getInstallURL, getConfigURL, getDataDir and getTempDir which return the correct value for now until I can switch things over all the way. I implemeted the config backend for LibraryURL and ServerLibraryURL, but nothing uses ServerLibraryURL at the moment. There is also a issue with MainDeployer with what it uses for the base of relative files. It current still uses HomeDir for this, cause I think that might be needed for codebase elements, but not too sure. Should straighten this out. In the mean time, I am using an eplicit URL for deploy/, which uses the ServerHomeURL. Testsuite runs fine... shall I commit this? --jason ___ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
Re: [JBoss-dev] We need more configurations in the distribution
Scott M Stark wrote: If run.bat and run.sh work as before for the default file based build/output and the testsuite runs then check it in. This is correct. I had to make one change to the testsuite, it was uing jboss.system.home, and should have used ServerConfig.getServerHomeDir(). Here it comes... --jason ___ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
RE: [JBoss-dev] We need more configurations in the distribution
Another idea on this. Maybe it would also be useful to have a /lib directory under the default and minimal directories. And we guide people to put their application jars in there instead of jboss/lib/ext or jboss/lib. That way, jboss libraries are kept separate from application libraries. Or is this too confusing? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Scott M Stark Sent: Monday, February 25, 2002 6:50 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] We need more configurations in the distribution No, he thought David's idea of moving everything to deploy was a bad idea. The suggestion from Hiram was: jboss/ jboss/bin/ jboss/lib/ jboss/client/ jboss/servers/default jboss/servers/default/conf jboss/servers/default/tmp jboss/servers/default/db jboss/servers/default/deploy jboss/servers/minimal jboss/servers/minimal/conf jboss/servers/minimal/tmp jboss/servers/minimal/db jboss/servers/minimal/deploy etc. Scott Stark Chief Technology Officer JBoss Group, LLC - Original Message - From: Bill Burke [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Scott M Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 25, 2002 3:28 PM Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] We need more configurations in the distribution I thought Marc nixed this idea -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Scott M Stark Sent: Monday, February 25, 2002 6:29 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] We need more configurations in the distribution That is fine with me. ___ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development ___ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
Re: [JBoss-dev] We need more configurations in the distribution
Agreed. Did we ever decide on how to reorg things? I think that short term that if we go with Hirams idea of server(s) directory and leave lib, client and bin out on top then we can implement this soon. I like the idea of having a per server config lib dir to keep core libs seperated from examples/plugins and such, but i think it will take a little longer to figure out how to best mod the ServiceLibraries to handle such. --jason Scott M Stark wrote: Rather than making less use of the configuration file sets, we need to make more. We should be shipping with at least 3 configs: 1. A minimal config that is just the JMX spine, logging, and JNDI. No ejbs, JAAS security mgr, servlets, etc. 2. A basic J2EE config maybe a little leaner than our current default. 3. A J2EE + web services config. The whole webOS config. Scott Stark Chief Technology Officer JBoss Group, LLC ___ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development ___ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
Re: [JBoss-dev] We need more configurations in the distribution
That is fine with me. Scott Stark Chief Technology Officer JBoss Group, LLC - Original Message - From: Jason Dillon [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Scott M Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 25, 2002 2:47 PM Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] We need more configurations in the distribution Agreed. Did we ever decide on how to reorg things? I think that short term that if we go with Hirams idea of server(s) directory and leave lib, client and bin out on top then we can implement this soon. I like the idea of having a per server config lib dir to keep core libs seperated from examples/plugins and such, but i think it will take a little longer to figure out how to best mod the ServiceLibraries to handle such. --jason Scott M Stark wrote: Rather than making less use of the configuration file sets, we need to make more. We should be shipping with at least 3 configs: 1. A minimal config that is just the JMX spine, logging, and JNDI. No ejbs, JAAS security mgr, servlets, etc. 2. A basic J2EE config maybe a little leaner than our current default. 3. A J2EE + web services config. The whole webOS config. ___ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
RE: [JBoss-dev] We need more configurations in the distribution
I thought Marc nixed this idea -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Scott M Stark Sent: Monday, February 25, 2002 6:29 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] We need more configurations in the distribution That is fine with me. Scott Stark Chief Technology Officer JBoss Group, LLC - Original Message - From: Jason Dillon [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Scott M Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 25, 2002 2:47 PM Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] We need more configurations in the distribution Agreed. Did we ever decide on how to reorg things? I think that short term that if we go with Hirams idea of server(s) directory and leave lib, client and bin out on top then we can implement this soon. I like the idea of having a per server config lib dir to keep core libs seperated from examples/plugins and such, but i think it will take a little longer to figure out how to best mod the ServiceLibraries to handle such. --jason Scott M Stark wrote: Rather than making less use of the configuration file sets, we need to make more. We should be shipping with at least 3 configs: 1. A minimal config that is just the JMX spine, logging, and JNDI. No ejbs, JAAS security mgr, servlets, etc. 2. A basic J2EE config maybe a little leaner than our current default. 3. A J2EE + web services config. The whole webOS config. ___ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development ___ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
Re: [JBoss-dev] We need more configurations in the distribution
No, he thought David's idea of moving everything to deploy was a bad idea. The suggestion from Hiram was: jboss/ jboss/bin/ jboss/lib/ jboss/client/ jboss/servers/default jboss/servers/default/conf jboss/servers/default/tmp jboss/servers/default/db jboss/servers/default/deploy jboss/servers/minimal jboss/servers/minimal/conf jboss/servers/minimal/tmp jboss/servers/minimal/db jboss/servers/minimal/deploy etc. Scott Stark Chief Technology Officer JBoss Group, LLC - Original Message - From: Bill Burke [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Scott M Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 25, 2002 3:28 PM Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] We need more configurations in the distribution I thought Marc nixed this idea -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Scott M Stark Sent: Monday, February 25, 2002 6:29 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] We need more configurations in the distribution That is fine with me. ___ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
Re: [JBoss-dev] We need more configurations in the distribution
Anyh objection to use 'server' instead of 'servers'. The singular form lines up better with the other directory names. --jason Scott M Stark wrote: No, he thought David's idea of moving everything to deploy was a bad idea. The suggestion from Hiram was: jboss/ jboss/bin/ jboss/lib/ jboss/client/ jboss/servers/default jboss/servers/default/conf jboss/servers/default/tmp jboss/servers/default/db jboss/servers/default/deploy jboss/servers/minimal jboss/servers/minimal/conf jboss/servers/minimal/tmp jboss/servers/minimal/db jboss/servers/minimal/deploy etc. Scott Stark Chief Technology Officer JBoss Group, LLC - Original Message - From: Bill Burke [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Scott M Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 25, 2002 3:28 PM Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] We need more configurations in the distribution I thought Marc nixed this idea -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Scott M Stark Sent: Monday, February 25, 2002 6:29 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] We need more configurations in the distribution That is fine with me. ___ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development ___ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
