Could you explain why virtual host linked to a war file deployment ? "sverker" wrote : Hi guys | I didn't receive much feedback on the virtual-host stuff. While I understand that it's not high priority for you to support virtual-hosts, I need to urgently solve this as I have some projects which has been on hold waiting for JBoss Portal (or similar component) but now I have to move on. | | There are three alternatives: | 1. Use JBoss Portal with my own modifications for virtual-host support and merge back later when eventually this issue is solved. | | 2. Dump JBoss Portal and use something else. | | 3. Work together with you guys to get virtual-host support implemented the correct way. | | No 1 solves the problem temporarily but can potentially cause bigger problems later when migrating to mainstream release. | | No 2 is possible but the alternatives I've been looking at I didn't like too much as they aren't properly integrated with the rest of the app server. | | No 3 is preferable, but how can we move forward? I can write the code but need to communicate with you regarding how to design and integrate the support. | | In http://jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&t=92151 Julien mentions namespaces. That the war file foo.war would be deployed to webapp:foo.default.default. | | This would work, the namespace is like I used context in my proposal implementation. The virtual host details will then be bound to the webapp:foo namespace. | | What do you think about that approach? View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3989966#... Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&a...