Hi,
> I applied Juan's patch, but I think we still need a better way to
> organize tasks.
Very nice patch, plan on using it this weekend.
<Putting on my Apple hat for a moment i.e. a message from Apple Legal
via me ;) >
Choosing to use the option of the build task to embed WO deployment
frameworks within a built framework could cause you to violate your
license agreement *if* you move your built application to a machine
that does not have WO deployment installed on it.
That being said for those of you who are interested in these types of
issues I would like to extend an invitation to you to signup for the
beta program of the next version of WebObjects
(http://appleseed.apple.com/webobjects). If you want to be part of the
program you should signup soon.
<Apple hat off>
Regards,
Max
> At 12:00 AM 8/9/2002 -0400, Reimer Mellin wrote:
>> it all depends what the long term goals are in respect to the ant
>> support.
>> Personally I am ready to totally ditch the script approach of Apple
>> in the
>> short term and migrate to war deployment in the long-term.
>
> Me too ;-).
>
> But as far as I am concerned, one of the WOProject goals is to be
> compatible with what Apple offers, and then provide all the cool
> alternatives, like the one submitted by Juan yesterday. Also I think
> that there always must be a way to deploy WOApp without a container -
> this is what makes it so great compared to JSP.
>
>
>> So in that respect I think it makes sense to <b>reduce</b> development
>> overhead in supporting the script based approach altogether and
>> therefore I
>> would 'vote' for a direct modification instead of a sub-classing
>> approach.
>> Why do you want to maintain a superclass functionality which is
>> destined to
>> die :-) ?
>
> I agree, I think it will die. But we are already maintaining it at the
> moment and will maintain it as long as there is any noticeable number
> of users who need it.
>
> Now about the ways to separate tasks. The patch submitted by Juan did
> not have your WOStart included. Quoting Juan:
>
> ---------
> Pure Java startup
>
> This is based on Reimer Mellin's work to create a Java class which
> replaces the scripts that currently start up the WebObjects
> application. This is called WOStart, please contact ...
> ---------
>
> So at the moment scripts is the only option at WOProject. Do you plan
> to opensource this work as well?
>
> Then we may organize tasks by the function performed - WOApplication
> (creates app with scripts) and WOStandAlone (creates app based on
> WOStart), WOWar (creates .war's). So the inheritance hierarchy can go
> like that:
>
> // has all core reusable resource copying logic
> abstract WOAppBase extends WOTask
>
> // adds scripts
> WOApplication extends WOAppBase
>
> // adds embedding of frameworks
> WOStandAlone extends WOAppBase
>
> // adds web.xml and .war packaging (by internally calling War task)
> WOWar extends WOStandAlone
>
>
> This gives us 3 tasks with clearly defined build output.
>
> What do you think?
>
> Andrus
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Thu Aug 15 2002 - 02:25:18 EDT