Simon Nash wrote: >I think option 1 for 0.99 is the best (and safest) that we can do in the time available.
+1 On 8/23/07, Simon Nash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I think option 1 for 0.99 is the best (and safest) that we can do in > the time available. So +1 for the 0.99 part. I need to give more > thought to 1.0. > > Simon > > Simon Laws wrote: > > > On 8/23/07, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >>On 8/23/07, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >>>On 8/23/07, haleh mahbod <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>> > >>>>I moved all the jars from calculator-webapp to tomcat/lib. > >>>>calculator-webapp > >>>>runs fine. What else is there that might cause a problem? > >>>> > >>>>Haleh > >>>> > >>>>On 8/23/07, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>>On 8/22/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>>I'll start a different thread to discuss the more long term > >> > >>support > >> > >>>>for > >>>> > >>>>>><implementation.web>. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>For now, comments inline to cover the immediate WAR size issue for > >>> > >>>the > >>> > >>>>>>0.99 release. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>Simon Laws wrote: > >>>>>>[snip] > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>1 - what is in the war that is build from these samples - > >>> > >>>currently > >>> > >>>>>all > >>>>> > >>>>>>of > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>the tuscany jars required > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>[snip] > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>Doing 1 is a relatively straightforward exercise of refactoring > >>> > >>>the > >>> > >>>>>>current > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>war into a slimmed down version. I'm still not convinced that > >> > >>it's > >> > >>>a > >>> > >>>>>>good > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>idea to remove the webapp samples and compress everything into a > >>>> > >>>>small > >>>> > >>>>>>>number of samples > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>I think we should just document how to copy the required JARs to > >> > >>the > >> > >>>>>>Tomcat lib folder and run the stripped down WARs this way, > >> > >>assuming > >> > >>>>that > >>>> > >>>>>>it works. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>The problem is likely to be the "assuming that it works" as last > >> > >>time > >> > >>>i > >>> > >>>>>tried this it didn't - there's various classloader issues. Changing > >> > >>to > >> > >>>>use > >>>> > >>>>>"deep integration" like we used to also seems like quite a big > >> > >>change > >> > >>>to > >>> > >>>>>be > >>>>>doing just moments before we cut a release so could we at least > >>> > >>>postpone > >>> > >>>>>looking at that till after this release? For this release I think > >> > >>I'm > >> > >>>in > >>> > >>>>>favour of just picking a few samples and demos to not ship pre-built > >>> > >>>and > >>> > >>>>>documenting that in their README's as it seems like the most minimal > >>>>>change. > >>>>> > >>>>> ...ant > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>I've been having a bit of a play with this and it's not straighforward > >> > >>to > >> > >>>get this to happen in a nice way at the moment. What I was trying to do > >>>was > >>>knock all of the tuscany jars out of the war and have the deployment of > >>>the > >>>tuscany jar be a manual step. > >>> > >>>For some (classloader) reason the it seems to be a bit of an all or > >>>nothing, > >>>i.e. you have to have all of jars that were orignally in WEB-INF/lib in > >>>tomcat/lib or have them all in the web itself. What I wanted to do was > >>>package the non tuscany dependencies in the war to reduce the amount of > >>>manual picking required when applying tuscany jars to tomcat, i.e. I > >> > >>was > >> > >>>prepared to go with "copy all of the modules knocking out jetty, tomcat > >>>etc". > >>> > >>>Some options at the moment given where we are > >>> > >>>1/ Just fix build.xml for each sample so that the wars can be built as > >> > >>is > >> > >>>and we don;t have to ship them. > >>> > >>>2/ Variation on 1 - Fix and change the build.xml to build a minimal war > >>>and > >>>alongside that build either a directory or a zip of all the jars that > >> > >>need > >> > >>>to be dropped into tomcat/lib to get the sample to work. > >>> > >>>2/ create the minimal war and give detailed manual instructions about > >>>which > >>>jars to pick out of the distro > >>> > >>>Anyone else have any other ideas. > >> > >> > >>I worry we'd not get anything other than 1/ done by tomorrow and even then > >>the READMEs etc would have bugs. So my preference would be for 0.99 do 1/ > >>for the big webapps but keep the small prebuilt ones. The big ones are: > >> demo-allert-aggregator.war > >> demo-mortgage-creditcheck.war > >> sample-helloworld-ws-sdo-webapp.war > >> sample-helloworld-ws-service-webapp.war > >> sample-calculator-webapp-ws.war > >> > >>Thats minimum changes to what we have today, just 5 readme updates, and > >>gives a distro size of less the 60Meg. > >> > >>For 1.0 do: > >>- change samples to be simple contribution jar's that can work in all of > >>standalone, webapp distro, Geronimo > >>- maybe keep one existing webapp sample to demonstrate that style of > >>packaging > >>- fix the ClassLoader issues so that Tomcat deep integration works well > >>and > >>have a sample/documentation for deep integration > >> > >>That should give a 1.0 distro size of less than 50Meg. > >> > >>Note also, i'd like to cut the 0.99 branch and create RC1 in about 9 hours > >>so if anyone wants to go for something other than this for 0.99 thats fine > >>by me but it needs to start getting done pretty smartly :) > >> > >> ...ant > >> > > > > Ok, +1 for 1 given the time we have. I have to go and get some sleep. But > > can do some of this first thing. > > > > Simon > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- Luciano Resende Apache Tuscany Committer http://people.apache.org/~lresende http://lresende.blogspot.com/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
