Hi there, Now that version 4.0.0 has been released, I've tried again to integrate Resin into the Wembed project, which uses embedded container engines to facilitate automatic testing and I can happily confirm that version 4.0.0 works fine :). Just some minor issues:
.- The default logging level is a bit verbose, as it is set at the info level and each line is doubled, as it is set to showing the full name of the class and the method from which the trace originated. Like: --- 22-may-2009 10:31:12 com.caucho.server.cluster.Server start INFO: resin.conf = null 22-may-2009 10:31:12 com.caucho.server.cluster.Server start INFO: 22-may-2009 10:31:12 com.caucho.server.cluster.Server start INFO: server = 127.0.0.1:0 (:) ... -- Is there any place where I can configure, more or less easily, the default logging level in an embedded instance? .- The embedded engine requires a JDK for compiling as it needs a Java compiler, but... is it possible to configure it to use an "embedded compiler" like Apache Jasper or similar so it can be packed with the engine? It's not a big problem, but usually the default behaviour for .jar files, at least in Windows, is to be run with the JRE, and that implies that, by default, Resin chokes whereas Jetty and Tomcat do not. It's "the user's fault" but in any case I would like to be able to make Resin easier for "the average Joe" to use. .- Las issue is a licencing one. Resin's license is GPL, so I cannot pack it with the regular release, as the project is under the LGPL. But I could create a different package with the resin libs and with the single Java file that start/stops the server and is called through a neutral interface, and release that class under the GPL. Would that be ok for you, Caucho? The thing is that I want to promote Resin and I want to make it easy for users to test their applications with it, but I don't want to run into any legal trouble :). Packaging it with the default release would be great, Jetty and Tomcat 5.5 are already included, but that won't work so having an optinal package would be second best. I don't think getting users to download the .jar files themselves and putting them in the appropriate places would make it too popular. So, is the separate package and acceptable option for you guys? Salute and keep up the good work! :) D. ------------------------------------------- Daniel Lopez Janariz (d.lo...@uib.es) Web Services Centre for Information and Technology Balearic Islands University (SPAIN) ------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ resin-interest mailing list resin-interest@caucho.com http://maillist.caucho.com/mailman/listinfo/resin-interest
