Yeah, I'm wondering about that too. If we can't run on Jetty, isn't
that a really big problem for our general servlet compatibility?
We should not need commons-logging.jar. SLF4J should be able to take
care of it (since it contains commons-logging emulation).
There are some limitations to including CDDL-licensed works, and
without looking at Winstone it's hard to say whether they apply or
not. http://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html
/Janne
On 26 Mar 2009, at 08:14, Harry Metske wrote:
Andrew,
just for my understanding, what is wrong with Jetty that makes our
webunit
tests fail ?
(and I agree that CDDL License should be ok, since we have more of
them
already)
Harry
2009/3/26 Andrew Jaquith <[email protected]>
Janne and all --
The web unit tests are bothering me again. Specifically, the fact
that
we can't run them means we aren't getting good visibility to problems
like the container login issue mentioned on the -user list. So I want
to fix them. Again.
I've gotten fed up with the bother of fixing the particular part of
our web unit tests that are broken -- the embedded Jetty container
that starts the test webapps. Fortunately I found an alternative
webapp container, Winstone, that does exactly what we need. It's
simple to run (can be done at the command line), and best of all it's
TINY. Total additional size is 320k, plus the commons-logging-api jar
(52k), which for some reason it needs. On the other side, I *think*
we
could get rid of the jetty-* jars in test (240k in total), which
means
the net addition is about 80k.
I think this is worth doing. I'd like to back-port this to 2.8 so we
can fix the tests there, too. The best part is that this should
actually work, in the sense that it means we don't have to worry
about
maintaining TestContainer, which was only meant to be good enough to
barely function. And at the moment it doesn't.
The only question is, is the CDDL ok? It looks like it probably is,
since we have a license notice for it in docs already.
Andrew
