[jboss-dev-forums] [Design of JBoss/Tomcat Integration] - Moving to a POJO configuration API

[scott.stark@jboss.org]

We have been discussing updating tomcat6 to support the POJO style configuration that is needed for effective integration with the jboss5/mc based kernel. Let's use this thread for the status/discussion. As of now its still just an idea:

"scott.stark at jboss.org" wrote : 
  | > 
  | > For now all I can say is that the parsing of the xml needs to produce 
  | > javabean metadata for which there is an api to configure both the 
  | > embedded tomcat instance as well as deployments. There should be no 
  | > feature of tomcmat we cannot set via a javabean api that does not 
  | > involve jmx or xml. Hopefully Bill can get the javaee5 injection stuff 
  | > done this week and then I can start working on porting this over to 
  | > the mc. Let's revisit this issue in a couple of weeks when I can state 
  | > where the configuration needs work.
  | >
  | 

"mladen" wrote : 
  | OK. I already posted a mail on the Tomcat-dev to make something like that possible. So far I see no one objects to the proposal.
  | Well, Remy is on the vacation :)
  | 
  | So, I'll do my best to split the Tomcat6 to catalina-core.jar without JMX/SAX and cantalina.jar with the current API on top of catalina-core.jar
  | 
  | Feel free to contact me for any problem.
  | Seems we don't need a talk today then.
  | 
  | 
  | Here the message thread about the subject from today:
  | 
  | Yoav Shapira wrote:
  |  >> 3. What do you think that we split the Tomcat core
  |  >>     from its configuration?
  |  >>     The reason of the usage is very simple. First of all
  |  >>     that additional package would be file system independent.
  |  >>     It simply means that we would have a Tomcat with POJO
  |  >>     API only, on top we could have any vitual-file-system
  |  >>     abstraction there is. It can be a simple File, or as
  |  >>     complex as email message.
  |  >
  |  > Intriguing idea that I think is worth exploring further.
  |  >
  | 
  | I think this would give us a completely new POV.
  |  From the final product of view it would change nothing, but it would allow the embedder to provide the config from what ever content.
  | 
  | The major thing is that we change the perspective from the configuration-centric to the application-centric, where the configuration would be requested, not provided.
  | 
  | All that can be IMHO done in a very simple way, simply splitting the core from the SAX/JMX. Of course that split might introduce few extra cycles because of intermediate API, but who cares if the server will take 1 microsecond more to load?
  | 
  | So, if we can do a catalina.jar on top of the catalina-core.jar one could use catalina-core without depending on the file system or JMX, without breaking anything.
  | 


View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3958831#3958831

Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3958831