[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
Re: [wtp-dev] For review: Alternate flexible workspace proposals
|
Does it mean that there will be one more copy operation, i.e. web
"source" -> web "output" -> actual WAR or WAR-like structure, at least
for containers like Tomcat 3.x which cannot deploy from workspace
directly? Also, can you explain how this proposal addresses
copy&assemble dependent modules?
--
Regards,
Igor Fedorenko
Chuck Bridgham wrote:
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