Thanks for this info, Wolfgang. Perhaps others who rely on the
standalone should weigh in, since I don't use the standalone
configuration. But from my perspective, if it lowers the support
footprint, it'd be good to eliminate a configuration that doesn't
offer anything unique over the default configuration.
Joe
On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 10:41 AM, Wolfgang Meier <wol...@ex...> wrote:
> Hi Joe,
>
> the standalone server is now just a different jetty/web.xml configuration. Previously the main difference was that standalone did not configure webapp as root context (and that's still the case), but since we moved nearly everything out of webapp, the two configurations are now very similar and you could easily adapt the standard configuration yourself to match the standard one.
>
> Wolfgang
>
>> HI Wolfgang,
>>
>> > Revision: 18240
>> > http://sourceforge.net/p/exist/code/18240
>> > Author: wolfgang_m
>> > Date: 2013-02-06 14:54:51 +0000 (Wed, 06 Feb 2013)
>> > Log Message:
>> > -----------
>> > [ignore] Get standalone server to work again. But do we want to keep this configuration at all? It is no longer much different from the standard deployment.
>>
>>
>>
>> What are the differences now? I'm always in favor of consolidation /
>> simplification.
>>
>> Joe
>
>
|
