[snip]
Venkata Krishnan wrote:
..or how about just supporting introspection of one level of jars within
wars.... if jars are nested inside jars we don't look at them... will this
bring down the complexity a bit.. or would it actually not matter that much
...
I think that the combinations that make sense are:
- now, .jars in .war!WEB-INF/lib
- then later, .wars in .ears
+1 on not trying jars nested inside jars, I've never seen that pattern,
and was even not thinking about it.
- Venkat
On 10/16/07, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 10/12/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
<snip>
I think this goes back to what I describing earlier in this thread, if
we want to support WARs as a first class SCA contribution type we have
to consider artifacts stored in JARs under WEB-INF/lib as integral part
of the Web Archive like other artifacts in the WAR. We'll need to open
these JARs and process them like the rest of the artifacts in the WAR.
Doing this will help Nishant and all others running Tuscany on WebLogic.
Ok but from what was said earlier ("we would have to consider this
carefully
as allowing for nested archives may cause all kinds of complications") it
doesn't sound like it will be a really quick thing to fix. It looks like
WebLogic always creates a jar from the classes folder with a fixed name -
_wl_cls_gen.jar - so how about just have some special case code to deal
with
that one specific jar for now just to get Tuscany running on WebLogic?
...ant
I'm not sure that one JAR "_wl_cls_gen.jar" or all JARs under
WEB-INF/lib will make a difference in terms of complexity. Maybe we can
fallback to the special case hack if a clean solution really does not
work, but I'd try suggest to try the clean solution first.
--
Jean-Sebastien
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
