tomee-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Is OpenEJB + Jetty dead?
Date Tue, 01 May 2012 22:35:10 GMT
cool if you can hack on it :)

about certification that's more complicated, certifying jetty+openejb is
not certifying embedded jetty+openejb (same for tomcat). But well that's
not so far ;)

- Romain


2012/5/2 Jonathan Gallimore <jonathan.gallimore@gmail.com>

> Just on the self contained jar point - I did at one point have TomEE
> embedded inside a .war file, so you could either deploy the .war file in
> TomEE, or you could do a java -jar myapp.war which booted an embedded TomEE
> and started deployed the app. It still relied on a temporary directory
> though - I imagine you could do the same for an all-in-one jar. In essence
> you need to do something along these lines:
>
>    public static void start() throws IOException {
>        webApp = createWebApp();
>        Properties p = new Properties();
>        p.setProperty(EJBContainer.APP_NAME, "moviefun");
>        p.setProperty(EJBContainer.PROVIDER, "tomee-embedded"); //
> need web feature
>        p.setProperty(EJBContainer.MODULES, webApp.getAbsolutePath());
>        p.setProperty(EmbeddedTomEEContainer.TOMEE_EJBCONTAINER_HTTP_PORT,
> "9999");
>        container = EJBContainer.createEJBContainer(p);
>    }
>
>    public static void stop() {
>        if (container != null) {
>            container.close();
>        }
>        if (webApp != null) {
>            try {
>                FileUtils.forceDelete(webApp);
>            } catch (IOException e) {
>                FileUtils.deleteQuietly(webApp);
>            }
>        }
>    }
>
>    private static File createWebApp() throws IOException {
>        File file = new File(System.getProperty("java.io.tmpdir") +
> "/tomee-" + Math.random());
>        if (!file.mkdirs() && !file.exists()) {
>            throw new RuntimeException("can't create " +
> file.getAbsolutePath());
>        }
>
>        FileUtils.copyDirectory(new File("target/classes"), new
> File(file, "WEB-INF/classes"));
>            FileUtils.copyDirectory(new File("target/test-libs"), new
> File(file, "WEB-INF/lib"));
>        FileUtils.copyDirectory(new File("src/main/webapp"), file);
>
>        return file;
>    }
>
> If I remember correctly, this is basically what our embedded TomEE
> arquillian adaptor does (it might have changed since I last had a go with
> it), and is basically an extension of the Embedded EJBContainer API.
>
> Check out
>
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openejb/trunk/openejb/arquillian-tomee/arquillian-tomee-moviefun-example/src/test/java/org/superbiz/moviefun/MoviesHtmlUnitTest.javafor
> an example of doing this from a unit test.
>
> Its been a while since I used OpenEJB + Jetty in the manner on the web page
> I linked to, but I'd definitely be interested in how you get on. I dare say
> it'll need some tweaking but I think the concepts should still be about
> right. I have a couple of things I need to clear down at work, and then
> I'll definitely be happy to help.
>
> On the certification front, never say never :) but a lot of work is
> involved. But if we can get the basics going in a way that works well, then
> I'm up for seeing what would be involved in certifying it.
>
> Jon
>
> On Tue, May 1, 2012 at 11:14 PM, Will Hoover <java.whoover@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > It may be just easier to get Jetty + OpenEJB working. There are also
> other
> > features that make Jetty a nice alternative. I'll look into the interim
> > solution that Jonathan proposed.
> >
> > I guess the answer to a certified OpenEJB + Jetty configuration is out of
> > the picture for the foreseeable future, correct?
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Romain Manni-Bucau [mailto:rmannibucau@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 3:14 PM
> > To: users@openejb.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: Is OpenEJB + Jetty dead?
> >
> > it cant out of the box,
> >
> > well maybe you should ping tomcat mailing list before. if somebody is
> > interesting it can help. Doing it manually should be possible (even if i
> > should look further to confirm) but it is really tricky for an end user
> > standard usage i guess ;).
> >
> >
> > - Romain
> >
> >
> > 2012/5/1 Will Hoover <java.whoover@gmail.com>
> >
> > > I would be interested on how to accomplish it.
> > >
> > > BTW, I know the thread is over a year old, but Mark Thomas says it
> can't
> > be
> > > done yet:
> > http://grokbase.com/t/tomcat/users/113h2c3j55/tomcat-v7-embedded
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Romain Manni-Bucau [mailto:rmannibucau@gmail.com]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 2:56 PM
> > > To: users@openejb.apache.org
> > > Subject: Re: Is OpenEJB + Jetty dead?
> > >
> > > i didnt try it but as in tomee we add servlet programmatically i dont
> see
> > > anything blocking to do it for listener etc... so i guess that's
> possible
> > > to use tomcat API to do so
> > >
> > > - Romain
> > >
> > >
> > > 2012/5/1 Will Hoover <java.whoover@gmail.com>
> > >
> > > > Embedded Tomcat 7 is very limited on functionality. One of the
> missing
> > > > features is the ability to run within a self-contained executable
> JAR.
> > > This
> > > > feature is vital when using it as a truly embedded solution. Unless
> you
> > > > know
> > > > something that I don't (which could very well be the case)?
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Romain Manni-Bucau [mailto:rmannibucau@gmail.com]
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 2:39 PM
> > > > To: users@openejb.apache.org
> > > > Subject: Re: Is OpenEJB + Jetty dead?
> > > >
> > > > couldnt we use tomcat? i find easy to hack tomcat than starting to
> > > > integrate jetty
> > > >
> > > > thoughts?
> > > >
> > > > - Romain
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > 2012/5/1 Will Hoover <java.whoover@gmail.com>
> > > >
> > > > > A basic solution would probably work in the short-term, but at some
> > > point
> > > > > we
> > > > > would need a certified solution going forward due to vendor
> > > > > requirements/restrictions.
> > > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Jonathan Gallimore [mailto:jonathan.gallimore@gmail.com]
> > > > > Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 1:00 PM
> > > > > To: users@openejb.apache.org
> > > > > Subject: Re: Is OpenEJB + Jetty dead?
> > > > >
> > > > > There's obviously been a big focus on Tomcat with the work that's
> > gone
> > > on
> > > > > with getting TomEE released and certified. I've always been really
> > keen
> > > > on
> > > > > getting OpenEJB working with Jetty, and have had a very basic setup
> > > > working
> > > > > which I have previously used for functional testing:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> http://openejb.apache.org/functional-testing-with-openejb,-jetty-and-seleniu
> > > > > m.html
> > > > >
> > > > > I'd love to work on this some more if there's demand for it.
> Getting
> > > > > something basic working I suspect wouldn't be too difficult, but
> > > getting
> > > > a
> > > > > certified solution would probably be a lot of work and so would be
> a
> > > > longer
> > > > > term goal. Do you need a certified solution or would something more
> > > basic
> > > > > be
> > > > > enough to get you going?
> > > > >
> > > > > Jon
> > > > >
> > > > > Sent from my iPad
> > > > >
> > > > > On 1 May 2012, at 13:41, "Will Hoover" <java.whoover@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Is the initial OpenEJB + Jetty now a dead initiative?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The reason why I ask is because the new embedded feature in
> Tomcat
> > 7
> > > > > still
> > > > > > is cumbersome to implement when compared to Jetty. This is
> > especially
> > > > > true
> > > > > > when a "real" embedded solution is desired that does not require
> a
> > > > > directory
> > > > > > structure to maintain. Jetty allows you to set handlers without
> > > > > designating
> > > > > > a home directory for web applications (which is very convenient
> > when
> > > > > > embedding within Java SE/JavaFX applications). I know Tomcat
has
> > done
> > > > > this
> > > > > > for compliance reasons, but just as OpenEJB has revolutionized
> the
> > > EJB
> > > > > world
> > > > > > by features outside the norm, so has Jetty in some respects.
> Don't
> > > get
> > > > me
> > > > > > wrong, I love Tomcat and use it extensively when applicable,
but
> > > > > sometimes
> > > > > > it makes more sense to use Jetty.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message