Re: [imbrium] Re: [Imbrium-developer] dynamic deployment of portlets

[Rogier S. <rs...@e-...>]

I would prefer the manifest file option. This doesn't impose any constraints
on people who want to develop portlets. How does Tomcat do this? I don't
think it's done through the manifest file. If I remember correctly that
thing always very empty....

----- Original Message -----
From: "Kees Jongenburger" <ke...@dd...>
To: <imb...@li...>
Sent: Sunday, May 11, 2003 10:59
Subject: [imbrium] Re: [Imbrium-developer] dynamic deployment of portlets


> On Friday 09 May 2003 01:02 pm, Gerard van de Looi wrote:
> > Maybe it's even better to do it the same way as a war file. We can give
the
> > various components their own subdirectory within the archive, so we
don't
> > have to mention them all in the deployment descriptor. This can avoid
> > errors in the deployment descriptor.
>
> Yes. this i a good idea. for mmbase applications (apps1) this is possible
, I
> have a working example here. once you have loded the jar in the
classloader
> it's possible to do something like
> MyClas.class.getResources("config/applications/MyApp.xml");
> but still you need an entry point because you don't want/can't gues the
last
> prat of the code (MyApp.xml). I think there are 2 solutions
> -add some info to the manifest of the jar
> (Mainclass/applicationName/RequiredApps)
> -create an interface that some classes might implement
(ConfigurationProvider)
>
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> Enterprise Linux Forum Conference & Expo, June 4-6, 2003, Santa Clara
> The only event dedicated to issues related to Linux enterprise solutions
> www.enterpriselinuxforum.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> Imbrium-developer mailing list
> Imb...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/imbrium-developer