I'm afraid many customers are not aware of the JEE roles... :-) On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 2:07 PM, Joseph Ottinger <j...@enigmastation.com>wrote:
> It depends on the container. But again, the Java EE spec says that the > *deployer* is responsible for connecting JNDI references to databases, > including or excluding dependencies, etc. > > > On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 4:36 AM, Jan Goyvaerts <java.arti...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> We're in the product business. One of the problems is that we're trying >> to make an application that fits as many servers as possible. >> >> So we can't ship an application server with it. Only a war file. WE have >> to fit into the customer's "ecosystem" without imposing them a server, >> database, etc... >> >> My question is just whether it requires hacking to have JSF included IN >> the war file and still run reliably. >> >> >> On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 10:19 AM, Roland Tepp <luol...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> This is the ever lasting battle of modularity vs self containment. >>> >>> I remember when I decided to try out OS X for the first time for real, I >>> was amazed and awed how simple the installation process of an application >>> was - you just dropped an application onto your computer and it was >>> "installed". >>> >>> Contrasting this with Windows and/or Linux way of installing >>> applications, the whole process seemed downright ... simple. Until I >>> stopped to think what it meant that is. Most of the apps in OS X are self >>> contained bundles (folders) of all the dependencies of that app. After >>> being horrified for a moment at the horrible waste of space, I was awed >>> again. >>> >>> Modularity is a great thing. In your application. And sometimes in >>> service/OS level as well. But nothing beats the deployment of an app that >>> can simply be "dropped in" to the container. >>> >>> So yeah - I see nothing special in deploying your app with all the >>> dependencies bundled alongside. >>> I'd even go one step further and bundle in the container (depending on >>> the audience of the application of course). There are certainly examples of >>> this type as well (think Jenkins from the top of my head) >>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> Groups "Java Posse" group. >>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/javaposse/-/NFwXklXEIuEJ. >>> To post to this group, send email to javaposse@googlegroups.com. >>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>> javaposse+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>> For more options, visit this group at >>> http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en. >>> >>> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Java Posse" group. >> To post to this group, send email to javaposse@googlegroups.com. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> javaposse+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en. >> > > > > -- > Joseph B. Ottinger > http://enigmastation.com > *Memento mori.* > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Java Posse" group. > To post to this group, send email to javaposse@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > javaposse+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to javaposse@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to javaposse+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
