Quinton, Can you possible give me an example based on what I posted earlier on what was in Tr.props? That might make it much clearer.
You will definitly be able to override the tr.props with stuff in web.xml. Check out this link for an example of web.xml values overriding stuff in a properties file: http://cvs.apache.org/viewcvs/jakarta-commons-sandbox/configuration/src/test -cactus/org/apache/commons/configuration/TestJNDIAndCompositeConfiguration.j ava?rev=1.1&content-type=text/vnd.viewcvs-markup I guess what I am looking for is a bit more guidence on what the bootstrap info should look like in the web.xml. Also, for lots of properties (which in my example was three seperate propeties, and could be more) web.xml may not be the best place...? Eric Pugh -----Original Message----- From: Quinton McCombs [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 1:06 PM To: Turbine Developers List Subject: RE: Anyone Review Configuration Changes? I think that all of the bootstrap information should come from web.xml. I don't really see any need for an additional configuration file. I would also like to see configuration data supplied in web.xml override TR.props. -------------------------------------------- Quinton McCombs NequalsOne - HealthCare marketing tools mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.NequalsOne.com > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 10:58 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Anyone Review Configuration Changes? > > > I'm sorry, I actually wrote the configuration service. > However, I don't want to go too far down the road without > buyin from everybody. I guess what I meant is that was the > tweak (the loop hole) that I had to make to Turbine.java. > > So, is the consensus that we load up a minimal prop file, and > then use that to bootstrap all the config stuff from? Or > does someone have an example web.xml to share. > > Eric > > -----Original Message----- > From: Quinton McCombs [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 11:54 AM > To: Turbine Developers List > Subject: RE: Anyone Review Configuration Changes? > > > No. There is no configuration service. Look at how the > current code works. > > -------------------------------------------- > Quinton McCombs > NequalsOne - HealthCare marketing tools > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.NequalsOne.com > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 10:47 AM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: RE: Anyone Review Configuration Changes? > > > > > > Okay, > > > > Here is my thinking now that I started writing code. Henning > > is right about the dangers of a service. To have the config > > work, it must load FIRST, before avaloncomponents or the > > regular components. Which means another tweak to > > Turbine.java: <snip> // > > // Be sure, that our essential services get run early > > // > > configuration.setProperty(TurbineServices.SERVICE_PREFIX + > > > > ConfigurationService.SERVICE_NAME + ".earlyInit", > > new Boolean(true)); > > > > configuration.setProperty(TurbineServices.SERVICE_PREFIX + > > > > ComponentService.SERVICE_NAME + ".earlyInit", > > new Boolean(true)); > > > > configuration.setProperty(TurbineServices.SERVICE_PREFIX + > > > > AvalonComponentService.SERVICE_NAME + ".earlyInit", > > new Boolean(true)); > > > > serviceManager.setConfiguration(configuration); > > <snip> > > > > My idea was that the ConfigurationService would load, find > > the various config settings required to load all the > > configurations. Populate a CompositeConfiguration from that, > > (including the default TR.props config) and then update the > > global Configuration. Then the later services all loaded by > > the serviceManager would have the proper configurations. > > > > Having said that, maybe what we need is more of a bootstrap > > config file. I don't know how important backwards > > compatiblity is, but we could say the if you use this code, > > then the default tr.props because a boot strap that specs out > > all the configfiles. (one of which could be itself). Then, > > instead of a service, we just go ahead and create the > > CompositeConfiguration right in the Turbine.configure() > > method. This then would be backwards compatable. > > > > However, if there are other suggestions, please make them! > > > > ERic > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Quinton McCombs [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 11:14 AM > > To: Turbine Developers List; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: RE: Anyone Review Configuration Changes? > > > > > > I am all for moving stuff into web.xml. > > > > -------------------------------------------- > > Quinton McCombs > > NequalsOne - HealthCare marketing tools > > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.NequalsOne.com > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Henning P. Schmiedehausen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 9:58 AM > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Subject: Re: Anyone Review Configuration Changes? > > > > > > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > > > > > >Secondly, > > > >I am thinking about the CompositeConfiguration stuff as working > > > >somewhat similar to how the various schedular jobs are > > listed in the > > > >TR.props. Basically something like this: > > > > > > >services.ConfigurationService.configurations=propertiesSource > > > ,JNDISourc > > > >e > > > > > > >services.ConfigurationService.configurations.propertiesSource > > > .file=/web > > > >-inf/ > > > >conf/MyProperties.props > > > > > > Then we're back on "ResourcesService", which got removed > > for 2.3-dev. > > > > > > The problem with "logging" and "configuration" is, that these are > > > special. You simply can't move this stuff into services without > > > starting to build loopholes and shortcuts, because > without logging > > > and configuration, you can't do very much else. > > > > > > >services.ConfigurationService.configurations.JNDISource.prefi > > > x=java:com > > > >p/env > > > > > > Stuff like this must IMHO come from the web.xml or from a > very very > > > small "meta" configuration file (which might simply be a sub > > > category of the TR.props) that gets parsed only with > Properties or > > > XML Configuration. > > > > > > Using a service for this got tested in T2.0 and T2.1 It > > does not work. > > > > > > Regards > > > Henning > > > > > > -- > > > Dipl.-Inf. (Univ.) Henning P. Schmiedehausen > INTERMETA GmbH > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] +49 9131 50 654 0 > http://www.intermeta.de/ > > > > > > Java, perl, Solaris, Linux, > xSP Consulting, Web Services freelance > > > consultant -- Jakarta Turbine Development -- > > hero for hire > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > For additional commands, e-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
