Thanks Taher.

Those are the big pictures. For now, need to work on the smaller issues.
So I will start with the patch for the loading of standard web application.

Regards,
James Yong

On 2017-05-06 18:48 (+0800), Taher Alkhateeb <slidingfilame...@gmail.com> 
wrote: 
> Hi James,
> 
> I guess we can start discussing this at a more detailed level once you have
> a PoC or more elaborate exploration of the exact "why" and "how". All good
> initiatives !
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Taher Alkhateeb
> 
> On Sat, May 6, 2017 at 7:41 AM, James Yong <jamesy...@apache.org> wrote:
> 
> > Hi Taher,
> >
> > Thank you also for the thoughts shared in the 'Loading standard web
> > application' and opening the discussion.
> >
> > Instead of converting OFBiz fully into a single web application, i suggest
> > we can have build functions:
> > 1. to compile OFBiz into a WAR. This build-WAR function is optional and
> > used only when the developer needs to deploy OFBiz WAR in a separate
> > Servlet Container. Only the necessary files will be added to the WAR file.
> > 2. For deployment to different SIT / UAT / Production environment.
> > 3. Accessed through Screens with OFBiz standalone running. i am thinking
> > of a studio plugin but will discuss it another time.
> >
> > I haven't looked at Birt but i guess it can be embedded into an existing
> > web application. Some apps like CAS SSO doesn't allow embedding out of the
> > box and has to be run as a standard web application.
> >
> > When using OFBiz WAR, any standard web applications dependency can be
> > deployed alongside. So should be no problem to support the loading of
> > standard web application in the plugins in OFBiz standalone.
> >
> > There should also be no impact if we add Tomcat SSO now. When deployed as
> > OFBiz WAR, Tomcat SSO will be irrelevant. Any SSO requirements will be
> > specific to the J2EE container or via another standard web application like
> > CAS SSO. But adding Tomcat SSO to OFBiz standalone, we can solve the
> > problems listed in https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-6963
> >
> > Regards,
> > James Yong
> >
> > On 2017-05-06 09:37 (+0800), Taher Alkhateeb <slidingfilame...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > Hmmm, I'm not sure, but on first glance I'm not sure the best way to
> > > integrate is by dropping in a war file? Maybe a more robust solution is
> > to
> > > have an integration with the engine on the API level and instantiate it
> > > from within OFBiz within its own control servlet. For example, take a
> > look
> > > at how BIRT is deployed.
> > >
> > > So yeah my proposal is more work, but a cleaner integration solution
> > IMHO.
> > >
> > > On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 8:06 PM, James Yong <jamesy...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Taher,
> > > >
> > > > I am trying to develop an OFBiz plugin that consists of
> > > > a) Camunda workflow engine (published as a WAR); and
> > > > b) OFBiz web app that make use of the workflow engine.
> > > >
> > > > Allowing OFBiz to load standard web applications will allow me to
> > achieve
> > > > the above setup using only 1 plugin, making things easy for end-users.
> > They
> > > > only need to download that plugin, and not worry about deploying the
> > > > Camunda workflow engine (published as a WAR) on his/her own, as the WAR
> > > > file can be downloaded automatically via gradle script during OFBiz
> > > > starting up.
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > James Yong
> > > >
> > > > On 2017-05-05 18:07 (+0800), Taher Alkhateeb <
> > slidingfilame...@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > This topic is very much linked to the previous thread that you
> > started
> > > > > earleri "Tomcat SSO" so they might as well be one topic. I think I
> > > > answered
> > > > > most stuff in that thread.
> > > > >
> > > > > However, I would add that in my opinion, maybe it would be simpler
> > if we
> > > > > avoid implementing it in this fashion (ofbiz webapp + standard
> > webapp)
> > > > but
> > > > > instead treat all of OFBiz as a single webapp by refactoring the
> > catalina
> > > > > container. Having two ways of doing the same thing is perhaps an
> > added
> > > > > complexity and more cognitive load on people for no added value that
> > I
> > > > can
> > > > > think of. Unifying, on the other hand, would be a huge added value
> > IMO.
> > > > >
> > > > > My 2 cents .. and thank you for bringing up this discussion
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 11:35 AM, James Yong <jamesy...@apache.org>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I am looking into allowing OFBiz to load standard web application
> > where
> > > > > > there is no controller.xml and the jar files residing in
> > web-inf/lib
> > > > folder.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Proposing to add an attribute named 'type' to the 'webapp' tag at
> > > > > > ofbiz-component.xml, i.e.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > <webapp name="myapp"
> > > > > >         type="standard"  <--------------- new proposed attribute
> > > > > >         title="Myapp"
> > > > > >         server="myapp-server"
> > > > > >         location="webapp/myapp"
> > > > > >         mount-point="/myapp"/>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This new attribute will help to differentiate standard web
> > applications
> > > > > > from those in OFBiz, and allows Catalina Container to load them
> > > > accordingly.
> > > > > > When type="standard", will load as standard web application.
> > > > > > When type is empty, load according to OFBiz way.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Any feedback is welcome.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > James Yong
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> 

Reply via email to