Re: WebLuke - include Jetty in Lucene binary distribution?
Hey John, I like WebLuke too, but am not sure what ever became of it. It seemed like it had a lot of traction (http://www.lucidimagination.com/search/document/3b06db2b12dffb70/webluke_include_jetty_in_lucene_binary_distribution ) but that the main objection was the size of the GWT stuff and a Web Server as part of the distribution. Not sure whether Mark has been maintaining it or not. In other words, I'm +1 for WebLuke (and Luke, for that matter, although I know it has some GPL components) being a part of Lucene, even if, just maybe, it isn't part of the main distribution. -Grant On Jun 5, 2009, at 11:27 PM, John Wang wrote: Hi guys: I am interested in what is the latest decision on webluke - I downloaded the zip, tried it and love it! Does it support all Luke's functionality? (especially the plugin support) Thanks -John On Sun, Apr 27, 2008 at 7:09 AM, Uwe Schindler u...@thetaphi.de wrote: Here another Servlet 2.3 compatible container: http://panfmp.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/panfmp/tools/mini-webserver/trunk/ It does not support web.xml files (instead uses a simple properties file), but it supports almost everything needed to get simple servlets running with path mappings etc. The support for web.xml was left out because of compatibility with very old java versions without xml support and to keep it small. JAR file is about 39 KB plus servlet.jar version 2.3 without JSP classes (31 KB) and commons-logging. We use it currenty for a CD-ROM based Lucene search engine. It's licensed in Apache 2.0 and Java 1.3 compatible (no generics, StringBuffer). The SVN currenty lacks documentation and startup shell scripts, but a working config file is supplied. The SVN contains a little bit more jar files, but needed is only webserver.jar, servlet-2.3.jar and commons-logging.jar. Some features are, that the static content servlet can serve files directly from ZIP files (e.g., http://localhost/file.zip/some/example.txt). - Uwe Schindler H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen http://www.thetaphi.de eMail: u...@thetaphi.de -Original Message- From: Nadav Har'El [mailto:n...@math.technion.ac.il] Sent: Sunday, April 27, 2008 3:08 PM To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: WebLuke - include Jetty in Lucene binary distribution? On Sun, Dec 09, 2007, markharw00d wrote about WebLuke - include Jetty in Lucene binary distribution?: The only open question is if we should bundle Jetty in the Lucene binary distribution as part of the build packaging. This could be used to launch both WebLuke and the existing luceneweb.war but adds about 6 or 7 meg to the overall zipped download size. Thoughts? My thoughts is that 6-7 MB for a tiny HTTP Server and/or servlet engine is way, way, too much. I'm surprise that Jetty, originally intended to be simple and embeddable, reached that size (which is 10 times larger than Lucene's core, for example)! For demo purposes, I wrote myself something similar, and its (uncompressed) .class size is: 14 K for the basic HTTP server 24 K for the servlet container (jaxax.servlet API support) And there's also the Servlet API itself from Sun, at around 40 K (this is part of J2EE but not of J2SE, so you need to include this as well if you want to use the servlet API). And that's it. I'm sure that similar tiny Web Servers can also be found on the Web, but if there's interest, I can see about publishing mine. -- Nadav Har'El| Sunday, Apr 27 2008, 22 Nisan 5768 IBM Haifa Research Lab |- |Why do we drive on a parkway and park on http://nadav.harel.org.il |a driveway? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org -- Grant Ingersoll http://www.lucidimagination.com/ Search the Lucene ecosystem (Lucene/Solr/Nutch/Mahout/Tika/Droids) using Solr/Lucene: http://www.lucidimagination.com/search
Re: WebLuke - include Jetty in Lucene binary distribution?
Hi John/Grant. I haven't done any more in developing WebLuke - although still use it regularly. As Grant suggests there was an unease (mine) about bloating the Lucene distribution size with GWT dependencies so it wasn't rolled into contrib. However I guess I'm comfortable if no one else is concerned about this. The GWT skin is useful for remote working but I think Luke could/should be built with a front-end-independent back end leaving the door open for Swing or SWT front-ends for work with local indexes. The current Thinlet skin is the piece that has the unfortunate GPL dependency. GWT is Apache licensed and so would be OK. I would probably need to upgrade WebLuke to the latest version of GWT prior to any contribution and would also like to de-GWT-ize the back end. I guess the main question is how to manage/build/package the contrib section given WebLuke could bring in Jetty and we already have 2 web-based contrib demos in there that could use this too. Cheers Mark From: Grant Ingersoll gsing...@apache.org To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org Sent: Monday, 8 June, 2009 14:03:49 Subject: Re: WebLuke - include Jetty in Lucene binary distribution? Hey John, I like WebLuke too, but am not sure what ever became of it. It seemed like it had a lot of traction (http://www.lucidimagination.com/search/document/3b06db2b12dffb70/webluke_include_jetty_in_lucene_binary_distribution) but that the main objection was the size of the GWT stuff and a Web Server as part of the distribution. Not sure whether Mark has been maintaining it or not. In other words, I'm +1 for WebLuke (and Luke, for that matter, although I know it has some GPL components) being a part of Lucene, even if, just maybe, it isn't part of the main distribution. -Grant On Jun 5, 2009, at 11:27 PM, John Wang wrote: Hi guys: I am interested in what is the latest decision on webluke - I downloaded the zip, tried it and love it! Does it support all Luke's functionality? (especially the plugin support) Thanks -John On Sun, Apr 27, 2008 at 7:09 AM, Uwe Schindler u...@thetaphi.de wrote: Here another Servlet 2.3 compatible container: http://panfmp.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/panfmp/tools/mini-webserver/trunk/ It does not support web.xml files (instead uses a simple properties file), but it supports almost everything needed to get simple servlets running with path mappings etc. The support for web.xml was left out because of compatibility with very old java versions without xml support and to keep it small. JAR file is about 39 KB plus servlet.jar version 2.3 without JSP classes (31 KB) and commons-logging. We use it currenty for a CD-ROM based Lucene search engine. It's licensed in Apache 2.0 and Java 1.3 compatible (no generics, StringBuffer). The SVN currenty lacks documentation and startup shell scripts, but a working config file is supplied. The SVN contains a little bit more jar files, but needed is only webserver.jar, servlet-2.3.jar and commons-logging.jar. Some features are, that the static content servlet can serve files directly from ZIP files (e.g., http://localhost/file.zip/some/example.txt). - Uwe Schindler H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen http://www.thetaphi.de eMail: u...@thetaphi.de -Original Message- From: Nadav Har'El [mailto:n...@math.technion.ac.il] Sent: Sunday, April 27, 2008 3:08 PM To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: WebLuke - include Jetty in Lucene binary distribution? On Sun, Dec 09, 2007, markharw00d wrote about WebLuke - include Jetty in Lucene binary distribution?: The only open question is if we should bundle Jetty in the Lucene binary distribution as part of the build packaging. This could be used to launch both WebLuke and the existing luceneweb.war but adds about 6 or 7 meg to the overall zipped download size. Thoughts? My thoughts is that 6-7 MB for a tiny HTTP Server and/or servlet engine is way, way, too much. I'm surprise that Jetty, originally intended to be simple and embeddable, reached that size (which is 10 times larger than Lucene's core, for example)! For demo purposes, I wrote myself something similar, and its (uncompressed) .class size is: 14 K for the basic HTTP server 24 K for the servlet container (jaxax.servlet API support) And there's also the Servlet API itself from Sun, at around 40 K (this is part of J2EE but not of J2SE, so you need to include this as well if you want to use the servlet API). And that's it. I'm sure that similar tiny Web Servers can also be found on the Web, but if there's interest, I can see about publishing mine. -- Nadav Har'El| Sunday, Apr 27 2008, 22 Nisan 5768 IBM Haifa Research Lab |- |Why do we drive on a parkway and park on http://nadav.harel.org.il |a driveway
Re: WebLuke - include Jetty in Lucene binary distribution?
Hi guys: I am interested in what is the latest decision on webluke - I downloaded the zip, tried it and love it! Does it support all Luke's functionality? (especially the plugin support) Thanks -John On Sun, Apr 27, 2008 at 7:09 AM, Uwe Schindler u...@thetaphi.de wrote: Here another Servlet 2.3 compatible container: http://panfmp.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/panfmp/tools/mini-webserver/trunk/ It does not support web.xml files (instead uses a simple properties file), but it supports almost everything needed to get simple servlets running with path mappings etc. The support for web.xml was left out because of compatibility with very old java versions without xml support and to keep it small. JAR file is about 39 KB plus servlet.jar version 2.3 without JSP classes (31 KB) and commons-logging. We use it currenty for a CD-ROM based Lucene search engine. It's licensed in Apache 2.0 and Java 1.3 compatible (no generics, StringBuffer). The SVN currenty lacks documentation and startup shell scripts, but a working config file is supplied. The SVN contains a little bit more jar files, but needed is only webserver.jar, servlet-2.3.jar and commons-logging.jar. Some features are, that the static content servlet can serve files directly from ZIP files (e.g., http://localhost/file.zip/some/example.txt). - Uwe Schindler H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen http://www.thetaphi.de eMail: u...@thetaphi.de -Original Message- From: Nadav Har'El [mailto:n...@math.technion.ac.il] Sent: Sunday, April 27, 2008 3:08 PM To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: WebLuke - include Jetty in Lucene binary distribution? On Sun, Dec 09, 2007, markharw00d wrote about WebLuke - include Jetty in Lucene binary distribution?: The only open question is if we should bundle Jetty in the Lucene binary distribution as part of the build packaging. This could be used to launch both WebLuke and the existing luceneweb.war but adds about 6 or 7 meg to the overall zipped download size. Thoughts? My thoughts is that 6-7 MB for a tiny HTTP Server and/or servlet engine is way, way, too much. I'm surprise that Jetty, originally intended to be simple and embeddable, reached that size (which is 10 times larger than Lucene's core, for example)! For demo purposes, I wrote myself something similar, and its (uncompressed) .class size is: 14 K for the basic HTTP server 24 K for the servlet container (jaxax.servlet API support) And there's also the Servlet API itself from Sun, at around 40 K (this is part of J2EE but not of J2SE, so you need to include this as well if you want to use the servlet API). And that's it. I'm sure that similar tiny Web Servers can also be found on the Web, but if there's interest, I can see about publishing mine. -- Nadav Har'El| Sunday, Apr 27 2008, 22 Nisan 5768 IBM Haifa Research Lab |- |Why do we drive on a parkway and park on http://nadav.harel.org.il |a driveway? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
Re: WebLuke - include Jetty in Lucene binary distribution?
On Sun, Dec 09, 2007, markharw00d wrote about WebLuke - include Jetty in Lucene binary distribution?: The only open question is if we should bundle Jetty in the Lucene binary distribution as part of the build packaging. This could be used to launch both WebLuke and the existing luceneweb.war but adds about 6 or 7 meg to the overall zipped download size. Thoughts? My thoughts is that 6-7 MB for a tiny HTTP Server and/or servlet engine is way, way, too much. I'm surprise that Jetty, originally intended to be simple and embeddable, reached that size (which is 10 times larger than Lucene's core, for example)! For demo purposes, I wrote myself something similar, and its (uncompressed) .class size is: 14 K for the basic HTTP server 24 K for the servlet container (jaxax.servlet API support) And there's also the Servlet API itself from Sun, at around 40 K (this is part of J2EE but not of J2SE, so you need to include this as well if you want to use the servlet API). And that's it. I'm sure that similar tiny Web Servers can also be found on the Web, but if there's interest, I can see about publishing mine. -- Nadav Har'El| Sunday, Apr 27 2008, 22 Nisan 5768 IBM Haifa Research Lab |- |Why do we drive on a parkway and park on http://nadav.harel.org.il |a driveway? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: WebLuke - include Jetty in Lucene binary distribution?
Here another Servlet 2.3 compatible container: http://panfmp.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/panfmp/tools/mini-webserver/trunk/ It does not support web.xml files (instead uses a simple properties file), but it supports almost everything needed to get simple servlets running with path mappings etc. The support for web.xml was left out because of compatibility with very old java versions without xml support and to keep it small. JAR file is about 39 KB plus servlet.jar version 2.3 without JSP classes (31 KB) and commons-logging. We use it currenty for a CD-ROM based Lucene search engine. It's licensed in Apache 2.0 and Java 1.3 compatible (no generics, StringBuffer). The SVN currenty lacks documentation and startup shell scripts, but a working config file is supplied. The SVN contains a little bit more jar files, but needed is only webserver.jar, servlet-2.3.jar and commons-logging.jar. Some features are, that the static content servlet can serve files directly from ZIP files (e.g., http://localhost/file.zip/some/example.txt). - Uwe Schindler H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen http://www.thetaphi.de eMail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Nadav Har'El [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, April 27, 2008 3:08 PM To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: WebLuke - include Jetty in Lucene binary distribution? On Sun, Dec 09, 2007, markharw00d wrote about WebLuke - include Jetty in Lucene binary distribution?: The only open question is if we should bundle Jetty in the Lucene binary distribution as part of the build packaging. This could be used to launch both WebLuke and the existing luceneweb.war but adds about 6 or 7 meg to the overall zipped download size. Thoughts? My thoughts is that 6-7 MB for a tiny HTTP Server and/or servlet engine is way, way, too much. I'm surprise that Jetty, originally intended to be simple and embeddable, reached that size (which is 10 times larger than Lucene's core, for example)! For demo purposes, I wrote myself something similar, and its (uncompressed) .class size is: 14 K for the basic HTTP server 24 K for the servlet container (jaxax.servlet API support) And there's also the Servlet API itself from Sun, at around 40 K (this is part of J2EE but not of J2SE, so you need to include this as well if you want to use the servlet API). And that's it. I'm sure that similar tiny Web Servers can also be found on the Web, but if there's interest, I can see about publishing mine. -- Nadav Har'El| Sunday, Apr 27 2008, 22 Nisan 5768 IBM Haifa Research Lab |- |Why do we drive on a parkway and park on http://nadav.harel.org.il |a driveway? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: WebLuke - include Jetty in Lucene binary distribution?
markharw00d a écrit : Any word on getting this committed as a contrib? Not really changed the code since the message below. I can commit pretty much the contents of the zip file below any time you want. Do folks still feel comfortable with the bloat this adds to the Lucene source distro? The gwt-dev-windows.jar contains the Java2Javascript compiler necessary for building and alone accounts for 10 mb. Including Jetty adds another ~6 mb on top of that. OK with this? Why don't use ivy or maven for that? M. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: WebLuke - include Jetty in Lucene binary distribution?
Why don't use ivy or maven for that? That would resurrect the Ant vs Maven debate around build systems. Not having used Maven I don't feel qualified to comment. Stefan, the Winstone server appears to be LGPL not Apache which also adds some complexity. The GWT compiler is the main cause of the bloat here. Cheers Mark - Original Message From: Mathieu Lecarme [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org Sent: Friday, 25 April, 2008 9:44:54 AM Subject: Re: WebLuke - include Jetty in Lucene binary distribution? markharw00d a écrit : Any word on getting this committed as a contrib? Not really changed the code since the message below. I can commit pretty much the contents of the zip file below any time you want. Do folks still feel comfortable with the bloat this adds to the Lucene source distro? The gwt-dev-windows.jar contains the Java2Javascript compiler necessary for building and alone accounts for 10 mb. Including Jetty adds another ~6 mb on top of that. OK with this? Why don't use ivy or maven for that? M. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Sent from Yahoo! Mail. A Smarter Email http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: WebLuke - include Jetty in Lucene binary distribution?
On Friday 25 April 2008 15:36:40 mark harwood wrote: Stefan, the Winstone server appears to be LGPL not Apache which also adds some complexity. Currently also CDDL. The author was not aware to cause some licence problems by GPL and thereafter offered the CDDL (from a mailing list discussion). There may be some chance to obtain an Apache licence if CDDL is not satisfying for the Lucene project. But - of course - your choice. Stefan - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: WebLuke - include Jetty in Lucene binary distribution?
On Apr 25, 2008, at 9:36 AM, mark harwood wrote: Why don't use ivy or maven for that? That would resurrect the Ant vs Maven debate around build systems. Not having used Maven I don't feel qualified to comment. Stefan, the Winstone server appears to be LGPL not Apache which also adds some complexity. The GWT compiler is the main cause of the bloat here. Can the build download the GWT compiler, as we do with many other things? I think including Jetty is fine. In fact, it would be great if we could do like Solr for our demo and have it startup in Jetty... but that is another day. -Grant - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: WebLuke - include Jetty in Lucene binary distribution?
Hey Mark, Any word on getting this committed as a contrib? -Grant On Dec 9, 2007, at 4:03 PM, markharw00d wrote: I've got a web-based version of Luke I'm happy to commit to contrib now. This version includes some tidy up for developers working on Luke. Eclipse .project and .classpath files have build path variables defined to cater for different install locations for GWT in development environments. Full code is currently here: http://www.inperspective.com/lucene/webluke.zip (17 mb) Unzip to contrib directory and run the usual ant build or import project into Eclipse, set build path variables, clean project, and run from there. The only open question is if we should bundle Jetty in the Lucene binary distribution as part of the build packaging. This could be used to launch both WebLuke and the existing luceneweb.war but adds about 6 or 7 meg to the overall zipped download size. Thoughts? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: WebLuke - include Jetty in Lucene binary distribution?
Any word on getting this committed as a contrib? Not really changed the code since the message below. I can commit pretty much the contents of the zip file below any time you want. Do folks still feel comfortable with the bloat this adds to the Lucene source distro? The gwt-dev-windows.jar contains the Java2Javascript compiler necessary for building and alone accounts for 10 mb. Including Jetty adds another ~6 mb on top of that. OK with this? -Grant On Dec 9, 2007, at 4:03 PM, markharw00d wrote: I've got a web-based version of Luke I'm happy to commit to contrib now. This version includes some tidy up for developers working on Luke. Eclipse .project and .classpath files have build path variables defined to cater for different install locations for GWT in development environments. Full code is currently here: http://www.inperspective.com/lucene/webluke.zip (17 mb) Unzip to contrib directory and run the usual ant build or import project into Eclipse, set build path variables, clean project, and run from there. The only open question is if we should bundle Jetty in the Lucene binary distribution as part of the build packaging. This could be used to launch both WebLuke and the existing luceneweb.war but adds about 6 or 7 meg to the overall zipped download size. Thoughts? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: WebLuke - include Jetty in Lucene binary distribution?
Looks good! I especially like the visualizations and can see people adding more visualization capabilities as it gets used more. I don't know that we have ever checked in IDE settings (Eclipse settings). In fact, I think we have svn:ignore setup in most places for them. Aren't they user specific at some point (I'm not an Eclipse user, so forgive my naivete) As for bundling Jetty, I don't have a problem with it. Might be nice if the demo just fired really easily like Solr's does just by saying jetty -jar start.jar. In that case, then, maybe jetty should be packaged somewhere else outside of WebLuke? Also, should this be in 2.3? Or should we wait for the next release so that it has a little more dev. running time? -Grant On Dec 9, 2007, at 4:03 PM, markharw00d wrote: I've got a web-based version of Luke I'm happy to commit to contrib now. This version includes some tidy up for developers working on Luke. Eclipse .project and .classpath files have build path variables defined to cater for different install locations for GWT in development environments. Full code is currently here: http://www.inperspective.com/lucene/webluke.zip (17 mb) Unzip to contrib directory and run the usual ant build or import project into Eclipse, set build path variables, clean project, and run from there. The only open question is if we should bundle Jetty in the Lucene binary distribution as part of the build packaging. This could be used to launch both WebLuke and the existing luceneweb.war but adds about 6 or 7 meg to the overall zipped download size. Thoughts? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: WebLuke - include Jetty in Lucene binary distribution?
I don't know that we have ever checked in IDE settings GWT development is much easier with the IDE and there is a fair amount of manual setup required without the settings to run the hosted development environment. Hosted development is the key productivity benefit and allows debugging in Java (rather than building, deploying then having to debug Javascript). GWT provides Eclipse project generators to get started and they do not target other IDEs e.g. NetBeans because they claim those IDEs typically do a good job of importing eclipse project settings (can't vouch for this myself, not having tried). Aren't they user specific at some point No, I have taken care to ensure these IDE setting files have all directory names etc replaced with variables - in the same way ANT build files use properties to avoid machine-specifics. In that case, then, maybe jetty should be packaged somewhere else outside of WebLuke? Yes, I thought that. I tried putting the only other current webapp, luceneweb.war under Jetty but it failed to do anything of interest out of the box because it requires an index to be built first. We could extend that app to include web-based screens to create and populate an index but I suspect that rapidly puts us on a development path heading towards Solr or SearchBlox. Also, should this be in 2.3? Might be an idea to let it bed-down a little first. I'm not happy with the (lack of) security at present and wouldn't want naive users complaining of vulnerabilities introduced by its deployment. Cheers Mark - Original Message From: Grant Ingersoll [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org Sent: Monday, 10 December, 2007 4:59:43 PM Subject: Re: WebLuke - include Jetty in Lucene binary distribution? Looks good! I especially like the visualizations and can see people adding more visualization capabilities as it gets used more. I don't know that we have ever checked in IDE settings (Eclipse settings). In fact, I think we have svn:ignore setup in most places for them. Aren't they user specific at some point (I'm not an Eclipse user, so forgive my naivete) As for bundling Jetty, I don't have a problem with it. Might be nice if the demo just fired really easily like Solr's does just by saying jetty -jar start.jar. In that case, then, maybe jetty should be packaged somewhere else outside of WebLuke? Also, should this be in 2.3? Or should we wait for the next release so that it has a little more dev. running time? -Grant On Dec 9, 2007, at 4:03 PM, markharw00d wrote: I've got a web-based version of Luke I'm happy to commit to contrib now. This version includes some tidy up for developers working on Luke. Eclipse .project and .classpath files have build path variables defined to cater for different install locations for GWT in development environments. Full code is currently here: http://www.inperspective.com/lucene/webluke.zip (17 mb) Unzip to contrib directory and run the usual ant build or import project into Eclipse, set build path variables, clean project, and run from there. The only open question is if we should bundle Jetty in the Lucene binary distribution as part of the build packaging. This could be used to launch both WebLuke and the existing luceneweb.war but adds about 6 or 7 meg to the overall zipped download size. Thoughts? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Sent from Yahoo! Mail - a smarter inbox http://uk.mail.yahoo.com - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: WebLuke - include Jetty in Lucene binary distribution?
On Dec 10, 2007, at 12:32 PM, mark harwood wrote: I don't know that we have ever checked in IDE settings GWT development is much easier with the IDE and there is a fair amount of manual setup required without the settings to run the hosted development environment. Hosted development is the key productivity benefit and allows debugging in Java (rather than building, deploying then having to debug Javascript). GWT provides Eclipse project generators to get started and they do not target other IDEs e.g. NetBeans because they claim those IDEs typically do a good job of importing eclipse project settings (can't vouch for this myself, not having tried). Aren't they user specific at some point No, I have taken care to ensure these IDE setting files have all directory names etc replaced with variables - in the same way ANT build files use properties to avoid machine-specifics. Right, you have done this, but that doesn't guarantee that the next committer who comes along will necessarily be on top of it. That being said, I don't care too much about it. I use IntelliJ and it has GWT support in it (although I haven't actually used it) Mostly, I just don't want to see some proliferation of IDE files in various places throughout the project. In that case, then, maybe jetty should be packaged somewhere else outside of WebLuke? Yes, I thought that. I tried putting the only other current webapp, luceneweb.war under Jetty but it failed to do anything of interest out of the box because it requires an index to be built first. We could extend that app to include web-based screens to create and populate an index but I suspect that rapidly puts us on a development path heading towards Solr or SearchBlox. I think it would be reasonable to have a script/batch file that created an index and then fired up the Lucene demo and WebLuke. Very simple and by all means nowhere near the level of what Solr or any other vendor provides. The pieces are all pretty much there, just need a script around it. Also, should this be in 2.3? Might be an idea to let it bed-down a little first. I'm not happy with the (lack of) security at present and wouldn't want naive users complaining of vulnerabilities introduced by its deployment. I think we should wait for 2.3 to come out, either that or mark it as experimental and put notes about the known issues in a conspicuous place, such as a README. -Grant - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: WebLuke - include Jetty in Lucene binary distribution?
I don't know that we have ever checked in IDE settings GWT development is much easier with the IDE and there is a fair amount of manual setup required without the settings to run the hosted development environment. Hosted development is the key productivity benefit and allows debugging in Java (rather than building, deploying then having to debug Javascript). GWT provides Eclipse project generators to get started and they do not target other IDEs e.g. NetBeans because they claim those IDEs typically do a good job of importing eclipse project settings (can't vouch for this myself, not having tried). If I where coming into GWT fresh (as many will be), I would certainly be happy to see a default eclipse setup file to get going. Initial configuration can be a bit of a hurdle. However, as someone who uses GWT quite a bit, I wouldn't use those settings. I would use the Cypal Studio plugin for Eclipse and the GWT4NB plugin for Netbeans. Both pretty much setup the hosted development for you and are more convenient than using GWT's eclipse tools. However that info helps. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: WebLuke - include Jetty in Lucene binary distribution?
9 dec 2007 kl. 22.03 skrev markharw00d: Thoughts? mvn jetty:run ? maven jetty plugin, that is. http://jetty.mortbay.org/maven-plugin/run-mojo.html -- karl - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
