Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
RE: [wtp-dev] For review: Alternate flexible workspace proposals


Agreed. The '.deployables' directory as we know it will disappear and there will be no assembly within the workspace. Servers can run directly from the workspace if they are flexible enough for a particular flexible project, and will otherwise do assembly outside of the workspace or during publishing. It would be helpful if there was adequate API to determine if a project followed a particular structure (e.g. are all of the resources in the regular J2EE structure on disk? is it only web content and Java content that is separated?) since some servers will only be 'partially flexible' and able to run directly on some structures but not others.

Igor - There will be no copying within the workspace once we get rid of .deployables. This pushes the responsibility to each server to either run from the flexible structure or do it's own copying (one step) to assemble the application into a supported structure outside of the workspace. This makes the Tomcat resource loader we've been discussing even more important since it will allow some versions of Tomcat to run without any copying or performance hit.

Thanks,
Tim deBoer
WebSphere Tools - IBM Canada Ltd.
(905) 413-3503  (tieline 969)
deboer@xxxxxxxxxx



"Konstantin Komissarchik" <kosta@xxxxxxx>
Sent by: wtp-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx

09/08/2005 04:38 PM

Please respond to
"General discussion of project-wide or architectural issues."

To
"General discussion of project-wide or architectural issues." <wtp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
cc
Subject
RE: [wtp-dev] For review:  Alternate flexible workspace proposals





The particular case I am thinking of is developing against two different servers at the same time. If I have my project associated with both Tomcat and WebLogic (because I trying to make sure my code stays interoperable), there will have to be two separate assembly directories so that the two don’t collide. I don’t think that we should assume anything about how a server would assemble the project. The assemblers should start with the source files and the java output directories and take it from there. Some (like Tomcat) will have to copy; some will not have to copy anything.
 
- Konstantin
 



From: wtp-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:wtp-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Chuck Bridgham
Sent:
Thursday, September 08, 2005 11:59 AM
To:
General discussion of project-wide or architectural issues.
Subject:
RE: [wtp-dev] For review: Alternate flexible workspace proposals

 

I agree more details/design is needed for the "web" source folders...    The output directory could be optional or better yet, the server could determine if any additional assembly is required.

I don't think the output location would change depending on server location because it is intended to specify spec level requirment, not server specific metatdata locations.

We need to support the Tomcat case where a single output location can be assembled, and this content would either be "built" at development time, or assembled at publish time.


What are your thoughts?


This proposal would come from WTP initially, as it is really solving a domain specific problem.


Thanks - Chuck


Rational J2EE Tooling Team Lead
IBM Software Lab - Research Triangle Park, NC
Email:  cbridgha@xxxxxxxxxx
Phone: 919-254-1848 (T/L: 444)


"Konstantin Komissarchik" <kosta@xxxxxxx>
Sent by: wtp-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx

09/08/2005 01:49 PM


Please respond to
"General discussion of project-wide or architectural issues."


To
"General discussion of project-wide or architectural issues." <wtp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
cc
 
Subject
RE: [wtp-dev] For review:  Alternate flexible workspace proposals

 


   





We definitely like the direction that this is heading in. :)

 
The combination of 2 and 4 should give a tremendous amount of flexibility to the users. I am a bit confused by 3 (“web” source folders). What would the platform provide to support this? Associating an output directory with these source folders seems a bit questionable too. Isn’t the output location going to change for web folders depending for which server the project is being assembled?
 
- Konstantin

 

 



From:
wtp-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:wtp-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Chuck Bridgham
Sent:
Wednesday, September 07, 2005 12:04 PM
To:
General discussion of project-wide or architectural issues.
Subject:
[wtp-dev] For review: Alternate flexible workspace proposals

 


Hi everyone,


Please review the document posted below, here is the first section:


Recently we have had two very productive meetings with the eclipse platform team, in understanding some of

                      the proposals for V3.2 that give WTP more options in regards to flexible workspaces/projects.  During these

                      meetings 4 proposals were discussed that tackle different aspects of "flexible workspaces"  Much of the existing

                      flexible project internal api is an implementation that satisfies many of the requirements declared last year.
                      Many of these scenarios should be solved at the platform level, and our current WTP api has a few serious
                      restrictions that forces us to re-evaluate our direction.


http://www.eclipse.org/webtools/jst/components/j2ee/proposals/WTPFlexibleProjectProposals.html


Please respond with your feedback soon.


Thanks - Chuck


Rational J2EE Tooling Team Lead
IBM Software Lab - Research Triangle Park, NC
Email:  cbridgha@xxxxxxxxxx
Phone: 919-254-1848 (T/L: 444)
_______________________________________________
wtp-dev mailing list
wtp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/wtp-dev
_______________________________________________
wtp-dev mailing list
wtp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/wtp-dev


Back to the top