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 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
