On 3/24/2016 10:00 AM, Erick Erickson wrote: > How does this play with the notion bandied about during the whole > "stop shipping a war file" of replacing Jetty with something? IIRC > Netty was mentioned as an example. > > Wouldn't want you to put effort into a dead-end...
Some build system work will be required either way. My current thought is an executable jar (like Jetty ships), but there's also the way we start ZkCLI, by putting the class name on the commandline. The discussion about Netty hasn't really gone anywhere. I have an email to the zookeeper user list that I've been working on for a while, where I plan to ask them what they think about Netty. They've got it as an alternate network option. I tried asking the question on the #zookeeper IRC channel and didn't get an answer after several hours, so I will send the email once I'm sure it's all worded right. Embedding Jetty is the path of least resistance -- it will require the least amount of work on the code. According to the jetty list, the Java side will be mostly just turning the jetty XML config into code, and it's already pretty close to Java code. We probably also need to turn web.xml into code, and I have no idea how difficult that will be. Once the build system work is done and we have a handle on how to embed Jetty, writing swappable network implementations (like Netty) will be *somewhat* easier. On paper, Netty looks excellent. I just don't know how much work it will require or whether we will like the results from a code maintenance perspective. Thanks, Shawn --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
