Re: [wtp-dev] For review: Alternate flexible workspace proposals

[Igor Fedorenko <igorfie@xxxxxxxxx>]

Does it mean that there will be one more copy operation, i.e. web 
"source" -> web "output" -> actual WAR or WAR-like structure, at least 
for containers like Tomcat 3.x which cannot deploy from workspace 
directly? Also, can you explain how this proposal addresses 
copy&assemble dependent modules?

--
Regards,
Igor Fedorenko

Chuck Bridgham wrote:
> I agree more details/design is needed for the "web" source folders...   
>  The output directory could be optional or better yet, the server could 
> determine if any additional assembly is required.
> I don't think the output location would change depending on server 
> location because it is intended to specify spec level requirment, not 
> server specific metatdata locations.
> We need to support the Tomcat case where a single output location can be 
> assembled, and this content would either be "built" at development time, 
> or assembled at publish time.
>
> What are your thoughts?
>
> This proposal would come from WTP initially, as it is really solving a 
> domain specific problem.
>
> Thanks - Chuck
>
> Rational J2EE Tooling Team Lead
> IBM Software Lab - Research Triangle Park, NC
> Email:  cbridgha@xxxxxxxxxx
> Phone: 919-254-1848 (T/L: 444)
>
>
>
> *"Konstantin Komissarchik" <kosta@xxxxxxx>*
> Sent by: wtp-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
>
> 09/08/2005 01:49 PM
> Please respond to
> "General discussion of project-wide or architectural issues."
>
>
> 	
> To
> 	"General discussion of project-wide or architectural issues." 
> <wtp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> cc
> 	
> Subject
> 	RE: [wtp-dev] For review:  Alternate flexible workspace proposals
>
>
> 	
>
>
>
>
>
> We definitely like the direction that this is heading in. :)
>  
> The combination of 2 and 4 should give a tremendous amount of 
> flexibility to the users. I am a bit confused by 3 (“web” source 
> folders). What would the platform provide to support this? Associating 
> an output directory with these source folders seems a bit questionable 
> too. Isn’t the output location going to change for web folders depending 
> for which server the project is being assembled?
>  
> - Konstantin
>  
>
>
> *From:* wtp-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:wtp-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] 
> *On Behalf Of *Chuck Bridgham*
> Sent:* Wednesday, September 07, 2005 12:04 PM*
> To:* General discussion of project-wide or architectural issues.*
> Subject:* [wtp-dev] For review: Alternate flexible workspace proposals
>  
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> Please review the document posted below, here is the first section:
>
> Recently we have had two very productive meetings with the eclipse 
> platform team, in understanding some of
>                        the proposals for V3.2 that give WTP more options 
> in regards to flexible workspaces/projects.  During these
>                        meetings 4 proposals were discussed that tackle 
> different aspects of "flexible workspaces"  Much of the existing
>                        flexible project internal api is an 
> implementation that satisfies many of the requirements declared last year.
>                        Many of these scenarios should be solved at the 
> platform level, and our current WTP api has a few serious
>                        restrictions that forces us to re-evaluate our 
> direction.
>
> http://www.eclipse.org/webtools/jst/components/j2ee/proposals/WTPFlexibleProjectProposals.html 
>
>
> Please respond with your feedback soon.
>
> Thanks - Chuck
>
> Rational J2EE Tooling Team Lead
> IBM Software Lab - Research Triangle Park, NC
> Email:  cbridgha@xxxxxxxxxx
> Phone: 919-254-1848 (T/L: 444) 
> _______________________________________________
> wtp-dev mailing list
> wtp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/wtp-dev
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> wtp-dev mailing list
> wtp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/wtp-dev