ARQ-1729 Add ability to deploy application to WAS Liberty server.xml file #16
Conversation
| // Return metadata on how to contact the deployed application | ||
| ProtocolMetaData metaData = new ProtocolMetaData(); | ||
| HTTPContext httpContext = new HTTPContext("localhost", containerConfiguration.getHttpPort()); | ||
| httpContext.add(new Servlet("ArquillianServletRunner", deployName)); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is there no API in Liberty that would allow you to dynamically resolve contextRoots for the different Servlets within a Deployment?
That would allow the user to use apis like @ArquillianResource(MySerlvet.class) to resolve the correct contextRoot within a multi module deployment.
|
I've made these modifications on my pre-beta branch and added them to pull request #17. Will keep this pull request open to discuss the remaining issues. @nstewart0206 we also need to add the documentation for the new configuration parameters to the documentation wiki at https://docs.jboss.org/author/display/ARQ/WLP+V8.5+-+Managed |
|
I've got the Arquillian Universe Showcase running on this v, only minor changes like data source and some inner class issue with Wrap. That means it supports: |
|
Oops, that was based on 17 :] |
|
@aslakknutsen Good to know, tnx for letting me know! Are you using the default deployType or the XML-deployType added with pull request #16 and #17? |
|
The XML option. I'll give the other option a spin as well.
|
|
@aslakknutsen Great! I was actually looking for someone to do some more testing with the XML-deployment code. I've also added a unit test for the xml-deployment option today, so I guess we're in a good position to release the beta in the next few days. I'll just make sure we also have the new options in the documentation before I merge the changes into master. |
|
Both deployType options work. |
|
@nstewart0206 I've now updated the documentation and merged your code contributions into the master branch. @aslakknutsen I think we're ready for Beta1; what do you think? - I'll keep this pull request for the remaining questions that we still have to address. |
|
@gpoul excellent! What are the chances for a Remote v for Liberty? |
|
@aslakknutsen neither the dropins or xml deployent types will work remotely and I'm not aware of any other deployment possibilities with liberty profile, so for the moment I don't think there's a chance for a remote adapter. |
|
Do we know anything about the IBM plans around this? |
|
Unfortunately I don't, but IMPACT might be a good opportunity to |
No description provided.