Re: [jboss-dev] Renaming server/web to server/jbossweb-standalone

I know this is premature, but whenever/if we need to claim full ee certification, we need to ship the tested profile/configuration. So you suggest something like: default (EE web) jbossweb all (everything and their brothers) [javaee] (EE full?) Two points: a) maybe the standalone jbossweb should be "rebranded"? :) See HornetQ, etc.

b) making 'default' being the EE web one causes more confusion? What other people think?

Jason T. Greene wrote: > The big picture is going to depend somewhat on what happens with the > profile service in AS6, however in general I would like the default > profile to be our EE6 Web Profile configuration (with some extras). I > expect this to be the most desired configuration. Standard should be > dropped as it is no longer relevant. All could remain to be what it is > today (everything including the kitchen sink). > > I would have proposed dropping server/web, but Remy is using it right > now for his jbossweb servlet 3 distro. > > Dimitris Andreadis wrote: >> I think it would help to explain overall what you would like to see >> as the supported profile/configurations in AS6 (or later) so that we >> get the big picture. >> >> E.g. in another thread I had suggested a possibility to simplify things: >> >> 0) remove 'minimal', or make it more like an empty osgi container >> 1) 'default' merged with 'standard' and certified for full EE >> compliance (at some point), configured for development. >> 2) 'web' certified for EE web-profile compliance, configured for >> development. >> 3) 'all' an extension of 'default' configured for development >> >> Now whether to have a more lightweight 'jbossweb' or just reuse the >> 'web' one, I think we should hear from Remy, too. >> >> Jason T. Greene wrote: >>> In order to prevent confusion between server/web and the EE web >>> profile, I would like to rename server/web to be >>> jbossweb-standalone, since this is what it is currently being used for. >>> >>> Any objections? >>> > >