On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 8:14 AM, Kevin Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 12:54 AM, Martin Webb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > > > > Currently we have servlets in gadgets/http and social/. > > > > > > This doesn't really make any sense -- all the servlets, regardless of > > what > > > data they manipulate, should go in one place. I suggest > > > org.apache.shindig.http or possibly org.apache.shindig.servlets. > > > > > > We can then ensure that we have consistency in the shared details > > between > > > gadget rendering and social data, such as OAuth. > > > > > > > Will it be possible to also extract the servlets out into their own > child > > maven project - so that they can be wrapped as a jar and used in both > the > > gadget server and in separate gadget container web apps as a maven > > dependency? > > > I don't really see much point -- the servlets are useless without the code > they depend on. I'd expect the non-servlet stuff to see some re-use (which > is the reason why the servlets are separate to begin with), but I don't > see > what good the servlets would do without the core classes. > > > > > > > Martin > > > > > > -- > ~Kevin > Kevin, True. I misspoke. Could we package up all the Java code into a JAR (or all the code that is reuseable outside of just the gadget server)? As per another thread: I'm running a gadget container on a different domain/port than the gadget server - and thus cannot directly call the metadata servlet from the browser using JSON with POST. I'd rather not clone the servlet code and copy into my gadget container... I'd also rather not add a proxy servlet to my gadget container to make the x-domain calls (this might be a sensible approach for some, but in complex environments this might not be possible) Regards Martin -- Internet Related Technologies - http://www.irt.org
