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