> > > > I believe that Cocoon does exactly this: that you can drop a WAR file > > > > containing a Cocoon application into a servlet container and it works. > > > > So we could borrow their model for doing this. > > > > > > Or fix the Cocoon model ;-) > > > > cocoon model: adhere to .war standard, run within servlet container. > > Nope. > <snip> > It just happens to be more used as a .war, but improperly, since it's at the > same architectural level.
Oh. I assumed the servlet was just a frontend to an internal engine. > > Use > > avalon components internally, and a container from the avalon excalibur > > project. > > This is correct. > > > Nothing wrong with that (just some issues with the container it > > uses). > > Not wrong, just *a* way of running it. > I think it would be cool if the *same* code could be packaged as a .sar or > as a .war. yup. Me too. > > I think what you should have is a container like phoenix (standalone, > > JMX manageable, hot-swap support), and a simpler container for use > > within J2EE in which you can deploy the exact same servlets. > > Let's call it Warhead. > It should be able to run .sars from a .war. =) Nah...it should just be able to run the same code you package into the .sar. > Basically, this is what I want. > > cd xml-cocoon2 > build installwar > -----> .war > build installsar > -----> .sar > > Have the possibility of calling blocks, having block dependency, etc, from > within Cocoon in both scenarios, without having to write customized > environments for both war and sar containers. > > Too much? ;-P We'll get there, just in a different way. > > Of course, this is not the easiest way to scratch your itch. > > Fortunately, Pete seems to be going down the same road. > > ? nevermind =) - Leo -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
