I could see value in publishing the war files, if geode will actually pick up the war file from the classpath and deploy it when these features are enabled. Udo - it looks like you actually made a change with GEODE-5660 to enable that?
+1 to making them .GWAR instead :) -Dan On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 9:07 AM Jens Deppe <jde...@pivotal.io> wrote: > I also cannot recall any reason as to the need to *publish* wars. > > However, please do not change the files to .jar. To John's point, despite > the lack of some dependent jars, the structure still conforms to a .war > format. > > --Jens > > On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 8:40 AM John Blum <jb...@pivotal.io> wrote: > > > Actually, to clarify 2 points. > > > > 1. Technically, it is a bit more involved than simply just validating the > > "format". For instance, the web.xml file must be valid and well-formed. > > 2. There was a reason why the geode-core and other Apache Geode libs were > > not bundled in WEB-INF/lib of the WAR files, since then it would create > > duplication on the global as well as the WAR file's (isolated) > ClassLoader > > classpath, particularly for the "embedded" Geode Servlet Container case, > > and as such, ClassLoader problems would occur. > > > > > > > > On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 8:33 AM Anthony Baker <aba...@pivotal.io> wrote: > > > > > Udo, > > > > > > Can you update GEODE-7241 to help us understand the reason why we need > to > > > publish geode-web* WARs to maven? I get that we used to do this but I > > > can’t recall why we choose that approach. > > > > > > There is one request for Pulse on maven (GEODE-6208). > > > > > > Anthony > > > > > > > > > > On Sep 24, 2019, at 3:44 PM, Udo Kohlmeyer <u...@apache.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > Maybe the better question is, WHY are we publishing geode-web and > > > geode-web-api. > > > > > > > > Pulse, from what I remember, could be a standalone deployment. At > least > > > that is what I remember. > > > > > > > > Most likely an oversight... > > > > > > > > --Udo > > > > > > > > On 9/24/19 3:38 PM, Robert Houghton wrote: > > > >> The geode-pulse module also builds a war, but does not publish it. > Is > > > this > > > >> an oversight, or by design? > > > >> > > > >> On Tue, Sep 24, 2019 at 3:34 PM Robert Houghton < > rhough...@pivotal.io > > > > > > >> wrote: > > > >> > > > >>> I am working on the change to get the geode-web and geode-web-api > war > > > >>> artifacts published instead of the jars. I have found the > > > >>> geode-web-management project is also producing a war artifact, in > > > addition > > > >>> to a jar. Do we want it to be published as well? What is the > > criterion > > > we > > > >>> use to decide? > > > >>> > > > >>> I think this problem was an oversight from the changes > PurelyApplied > > > and I > > > >>> made to the build when we made the publish plugin 'opt-in' instead > of > > > >>> forced by the root project. Easy to publish one or the other, but I > > am > > > not > > > >>> qualified to decide whether a war or jar is more appropriate for > > these > > > >>> modules. > > > >>> > > > >>> Thank you, > > > >>> -Robert > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > -- > > -John > > john.blum10101 (skype) > > >
