On Sep 9, 2005, at 9:47 AM, Aaron Mulder wrote:
On Fri, 9 Sep 2005, David Jencks wrote:
I don't fully understand what this issue is about, but I would like to
point out that the first assumption (that there is one web container
per image) is currently wrong and IMO not likely to change for M5
I'm not sure I understand. I really oppose shipping a server with
both Tomcat and Jetty active. I thought it was going to be a Tomcat
download and a Jetty download. And if this was achieved by having both
present in the server but one was disabled and effectively invisible,
fine, that's effectively equivalent to only one being present.
Aaron
On Sep 9, 2005, at 9:30 AM, Joe Bohn wrote:
Of course you are correct David. Your hard work has made it possible
so that we can support multiple containers concurrently. My statement
below was not directly related to this design. I was only trying to
keep things consistent in the console for now (which always assumes
just 1 active web container at a time). Since the console is still
being considered a "tech preview" for M5 I don't think this will
present a problem for that delivery.
However, since you brought it up ... did we ever gain consensus on our
packaging plans and typical environment? I wasn't aware that this
issue was settled (not that I want to start the discussion here :-) ).
IIRC there were questions about this being a scenario that most users
would understand and I don't believe that we have yet identified a
practical scenario where a user would require this. There were also
questions about supporting multiple containers of the same or
different versions and any problems that might arise as a result (such
as class loader issues).
I'm referring to the discussion that you started in this thread so
perhaps we should take the discussion up again on that thread.
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/geronimo-dev/200509.mbox/
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
If has been decided that we will give the user the option of
configuring the system with numerous web containers then we need to
expose this fact in the console and possibly in other places for
management capabilities (do we currently have a command line that
would need to change?). From the web console perspective we will also
need to evaluate how we can manage this complexity without confusing
the typical user (who I suspect will probably be running just 1 web
container).
-Joe
.
Right now, both jetty and tomcat are running in the standard server.
We can make it so only one starts by default fairly easily by changing
the config.list. The "tomcat" goal or setting the web container to
tomcat changes the ports each container uses by default, but both start
at the moment.
However, if we ship both configurations, it is going to be very easy to
get 2 web containers running at once, whether on purpose or not, by
starting a configuration that is deployed to the "other" web container.
I don't see a great deal of utility for running multiple web containers
in one geronimo server, but I'm not an end user. I certainly hesitate
to tell our end users that they will never want to do it. Since we
have the technical ability to do it I would prefer that the management
console support it in some way or at least not prevent it.
thanks
david jencks
