Jetty Express is missing

142 views
Skip to first unread message

Kolbenschlag, Clemens

unread,
Feb 6, 2015, 4:54:12 AM2/6/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com

Hi all

 

Is there any way to get Lucee Express with Jetty?

 

The current express version with tomcat is not possible in the current way we organize our development. We need at the moment the express jetty. No Jetty no Lucee… sorry.

 

Bye

Clemens

Mark Drew

unread,
Feb 6, 2015, 5:09:01 AM2/6/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com
It’s just a web app so yes. 
add the jars
add the servlet definition and off you go. 

MD 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lucee" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lucee+un...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lu...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/ED0A9D79440AB54EBDBB55E69BC9C8B701E86E7479C9%40media-dc03.media-muc.de.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Michael Offner

unread,
Feb 6, 2015, 5:10:46 AM2/6/15
to lucee
the build process also generates a jetty express version, I just uploading it to here...

my upstream is extremely slow, so if you don't see it now (11:10), wait a other minute or 2.

Micha

--

Kolbenschlag, Clemens

unread,
Feb 6, 2015, 9:45:31 AM2/6/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com

Hi Micha,

 

fantastic job. I downloaded the jetty express version, make same configuration changes for our environment and VIOLA!

First application runs with Lucee. YEAH!

I’m sure that all apps will run, but they haven’t all the cfadminsetup.cfm to install the datasources etc. So I need some time to remember he passwords ;-)

 

I really hope you will further support the jetty express version in your download program.

 

Bye

Cleemns

Kai Koenig

unread,
Feb 6, 2015, 4:08:54 PM2/6/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com
As much as your help in this case is most likely really appreciated, by Clemens but isn’t providing those builds just opening up the whole which-server-are-you-running-on-support-can-of-worms again?

Cheers,
Kai
Message has been deleted

Rani

unread,
Feb 6, 2015, 4:19:24 PM2/6/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com
Hi Micha,

Thank you very much for your time building a jetty express version of Lucee. I am kind of getting used to it instead of tomcat.
I also hope that you will further support the jetty express version.

kind regards

denstar

unread,
Feb 6, 2015, 6:52:43 PM2/6/15
to lucee
On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 2:08 PM, Kai Koenig wrote:
As much as your help in this case is most likely really appreciated, by Clemens but isn’t providing those builds just opening up the whole which-server-are-you-running-on-support-can-of-worms again?
 
No.  The problem is with the way people ask for help, not the amount of things people can ask for help on.  There's nothing stopping anyone from doing whatever they'd like, and asking for help on their chosen path.

I want to make it easy for people to choose the path they feel the most comfortable with.

If we are *clear* on the downloads page, offering the "recommended" install type first, and then providing a link to other options, I feel that would be enough.  (Especially since some of the options are really sweet, and much easier than doing it "by hand".)

Den "all about teh easy" Uno

Kai Koenig

unread,
Feb 6, 2015, 6:54:42 PM2/6/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com
I disagree, you automatically create an expectation of whatever the Lucee Foundation offering for download being in whatever way supported.

Cheers
Kai

denstar

unread,
Feb 6, 2015, 8:20:59 PM2/6/15
to lucee
I disagree, you automatically create an expectation of whatever the Lucee Foundation offering for download being in whatever way supported.

I guess it depends on what you mean by "support".

I want Lucee to succeed, and lowering the barrier for entry is one (of many) ways to make that happen.

Maybe we should just provide a link to the source code-- that'd make things even easier!  :-)p

-Den*

Kai Koenig

unread,
Feb 6, 2015, 8:40:42 PM2/6/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com


I disagree, you automatically create an expectation of whatever the Lucee Foundation offering for download being in whatever way supported.

I guess it depends on what you mean by "support".


Apart from commercial support, quite easy:

If Lucee.org provides bundled builds and/or installers with a variety of servlet engines, people will consider those as supported, e.g. tested on (not only unit tests, but the whole thing - functional testing, integration testing etc)

Someone downloads a build from Lucee.org on Servlet Engine XYZ WILL come back to this mailing list (and rightfully so imho) expect some useful feedback/community support in getting his stuff going. If members of the Lucee foundation and this community are happy to do so, that’s fine. If such a community support however is then not supported people will get annoyed and pissed off and just say “That sh*t Lucee server THEY provide doesn’t even work properly”. And if you go over the old Railo mailing list you’ll see cases in which similar things happened (not to the extent of swearing), but people expecting support for a Railo-provided Jetty or Resin or whatever build where in reality most users on the list used Tomcat and wouldn’t have a) a clue or b) any interest in any other engine.

With a small community like this, I’d strongly recommend to provide the following only:

- Source Code with Build instructions
- .jar and .war builds for people to deploy on their own (and IF someone from a 3rd party writes up an instruction on who to do that on Jetty, IBM WebSphere or whatever, even better)
- Express Builds on ONE Engine (preferably Tomcat imho)
- Installers with ONE Engine (the same as in the Express Builds)

Cheers
Kai

denstar

unread,
Feb 6, 2015, 11:39:02 PM2/6/15
to lucee
On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 6:40 PM, Kai Koenig wrote:
I disagree, you automatically create an expectation of whatever the Lucee Foundation offering for download being in whatever way supported.

I guess it depends on what you mean by "support".
Apart from commercial support, quite easy:

If Lucee.org provides bundled builds and/or installers with a variety of servlet engines, people will consider those as supported, e.g. tested on (not only unit tests, but the whole thing - functional testing, integration testing etc)

I see it differently.  I think people will see a package running on their favorite X, and go "hey, how cool is that, I can simply get Lucee on X!"
 
Maybe they wouldn't have bothered to try it, had it not been for the X factor.

I know I'm that way-- my brain relates things, and the more positive relations to Lucee, the better, says I.  (Plus, I loves me a lot of X, and so "easy Lucee on X" is in my best interest-- that others like X too is just icing on the cake.)
 
Someone downloads a build from Lucee.org on Servlet Engine XYZ WILL come back to this mailing list (and rightfully so imho) expect some useful feedback/community support in getting his stuff going. If members of the Lucee foundation and this community are happy to do so, that’s fine. If such a community support however is then not supported people will get annoyed and pissed off and just say “That sh*t Lucee server THEY provide doesn’t even work properly”. And if you go over the old Railo mailing list you’ll see cases in which similar things happened (not to the extent of swearing), but people expecting support for a Railo-provided Jetty or Resin or whatever build where in reality most users on the list used Tomcat and wouldn’t have a) a clue or b) any interest in any other engine.

We should ignore the many people who say they're happy, because a few say they are not?  We are not selling the engine+tomcat (or any other container).  It's reasonable to expect the packages to work, but beyond that, we're selling services.

And I love that.  Seems like it's the only way to move forward in an open source world.  Royalties are nice, but I'm not afraid of work-- I love what I do.

I'd take 30 happy new users, minus 3 unhappy ones-- the happy ones will more than make up for the others.

 
With a small community like this, I’d strongly recommend to provide the following only:

- Source Code with Build instructions
- .jar and .war builds for people to deploy on their own (and IF someone from a 3rd party writes up an instruction on who to do that on Jetty, IBM WebSphere or whatever, even better)
- Express Builds on ONE Engine (preferably Tomcat imho)
- Installers with ONE Engine (the same as in the Express Builds)

So no RPM bundles/repos?  No deb bundles/repos?  No "all in one, all dependencies included, ready to run" bundles?

What does an "express" build mean to you?  Should we include mod_cfml with it (vis-a-vis we're expecting it to be used with either Apache or IIS)?  Why not call it "lucee-tomcat"?

I've got a feeling for what makes our community happy, and it isn't making things harder than they have to be.  Limiting options is one way of making things easy, I'll give you that.  I just don't think it's the best kind of easy. 

|Den

Adam Cameron

unread,
Feb 7, 2015, 2:31:03 AM2/7/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com


On Friday, 6 February 2015 23:54:42 UTC, Kai Koenig wrote:


I disagree, you automatically create an expectation of whatever the Lucee Foundation offering for download being in whatever way supported.


I'm with Kai on this. Lucee should only offer direct downloads for what they themselves actively want to support. And perhaps provide a separate place for community-driven initiatives, making it clear that those are community-driven initiatives.

In my experience, the CFML community ten both towards being a bit: a) needy; b) thick. So they will (willfully, I suspect) misunderstand the difference between "hosted for download here", and "supported here".

And this is fairly easily headed-off by hosting them on a clearly-labelled "third-party downloads" page or some such.

I would even consider hosting the binary installers for the general Tomcat versions in such a way.

Lucee should only provide for what they themselves actively support. And facilitate finding the stuff that third-parties provide/support.

-- 
Adam

Michael Offner

unread,
Feb 7, 2015, 3:43:04 AM2/7/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com
Let me explain why there's a jetty version in the first place. In fact this version was first.
I did an update of the jetty version, then we discussed to move to tomcat, not because tomcat is better, simply because tomcat is already used for the installers.
So you have do deal only with one platform what makes life easier.
But I didn't ditch the jetty version, it is still in the build process, but it is not on the website (Lucee.org), I have no plan to change that, not because of the extra effort it takes to support it, simply because it could be confusing to have 2 distinct versions.
That is also the reason we have only one express version on the homepage now, not 5 like in the past!
On the Railo mailing list the support questions for jetty was extremely low, so having jetty in the download or in the build process will give us not a lot of extra effort. 
Let's be pragmatic on that, everybody is free to give support for that anyway. Maybe we will remove that version from the build process in the future when it is outdated, but that will stop nobody to still build and ask a lot of question about it. Hell on the Railo mailing list people was asking for help with Railo on jrun!?

Las is not providing professional support anyway, only our members do, what they support in their support contracts is up to them and not bound to what is on the las homepage. 

Micha

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lucee" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lucee+un...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lu...@googlegroups.com.

James Holmes

unread,
Feb 7, 2015, 3:44:34 AM2/7/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com

Actually, the cost of those unhappy customers is unknowable. They damage they cause by actively detracting from the product spreads as others relay the message. A few bad experiences might add up to well over 30 potential customers who never end up trying the product.

Michael Offner

unread,
Feb 7, 2015, 3:52:32 AM2/7/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com
For me it is much more of interest to be on platforms like heroku, than think about a hidden express version.

Micha
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lucee" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lucee+un...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lu...@googlegroups.com.

Mark Drew

unread,
Feb 7, 2015, 4:04:34 AM2/7/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com
Heroku, docker, and all the other platforms are much more important that quibbling over the servlet container. 

I just wished I could do 
sudo apt-get install lucee-single
or 
sudo apt-get install lucee-multi

or sudo apt-get install lucee-tomcat8

Thoughts?

MD 

James Holmes

unread,
Feb 7, 2015, 4:21:20 AM2/7/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com

Yep, if I can just "fig up" and get a working server, I'm happy.

Adam Cameron

unread,
Feb 7, 2015, 8:04:02 AM2/7/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com
On 7 February 2015 at 08:44, James Holmes <james....@gmail.com> wrote:

Actually, the cost of those unhappy customers is unknowable. They damage they cause by actively detracting from the product spreads as others relay the message. A few bad experiences might add up to well over 30 potential customers who never end up trying the product.


Indeed. Take myself for example: if you know me from the ColdFusion community, what percentage of my wittering is irritation @ Adobe, and what %age is saying "yeah, good work"? And - on the whole - I am a 80% happy ColdFusion user!

People don't tend to gush when things are working right, because that's actually the baseline expectation. However people do - and they should - complain when things are not right.

That said... the challenge here is for someone to avail the Jetty install, and have ppl understand it's supported by the community, not the Association. Then everyone is happy. And that won't be that hard.

-- 
Adam

Andrew Penhorwood

unread,
Feb 7, 2015, 10:00:02 AM2/7/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com
I am with Denny on this one but I do like the idea of 3rd party bundles which by its very nature says "NOT Official".  For many open source projects don't provide windows 64 bit software so you always have to find an unsupported version.  If those versions did not exist I would not be using that software.  I would have found something else to use.  So choice is a good things but those choices don't have to come from Micha.

Peter Boughton

unread,
Feb 7, 2015, 10:16:01 AM2/7/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com
I've only quickly scanned through this thread, and will come back later
when I have more time to comment on some of the topics raised.

However, just quickly: regardless of what lucee.org does or does not
offer, I will be maintaining a Lucee on Jetty package.

Not referring to it as an "express" version because:
a) I don't want it confused as an official build;
b) lots of people mistake "express" for "toy".

I'll say more later but got to go now.

denstar

unread,
Feb 7, 2015, 2:01:24 PM2/7/15
to lucee
On Sat, Feb 7, 2015 at 12:31 AM, Adam Cameron wrote:


On Friday, 6 February 2015 23:54:42 UTC, Kai Koenig wrote:


I disagree, you automatically create an expectation of whatever the Lucee Foundation offering for download being in whatever way supported.


I'm with Kai on this. Lucee should only offer direct downloads for what they themselves actively want to support. And perhaps provide a separate place for community-driven initiatives, making it clear that those are community-driven initiatives.
 ...

I was just being a bit thick.

In retrospect, this is the freaking web, right?  Links are cool.  A click is a click. :)

I like the idea of just having the war and the jar/libs, actually, and not even having "express" on the main DL page, with links to cfmlprojects for the various packages.

-Den

denstar

unread,
Feb 7, 2015, 2:04:36 PM2/7/15
to lucee
On Sat, Feb 7, 2015 at 1:44 AM, James Holmes wrote:

Actually, the cost of those unhappy customers is unknowable. They damage they cause by actively detracting from the product spreads as others relay the message. A few bad experiences might add up to well over 30 potential customers who never end up trying the product.

Guess it depends on who the unhappy customer is, and who the happy customer is, as far as figuring out a rough guesstimate.  :)

-Den

Michael Offner

unread,
Feb 7, 2015, 2:16:17 PM2/7/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com
The express version has a long history, the first express version I did, was a jetty blue dragon bundle long before Railo was even born, we sold back then our CMS together with bd and a jre on a 16mb usb stick at a conference, you could start then the CMS from the stick.
It was hard to reduce the bd and the jre to get it on that stick.

With that the express version was born ;-).

The idea of the express version is to play around, a toy in the end.
So the question is, are there better ways to do so today?

Micha
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lucee" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lucee+un...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lu...@googlegroups.com.

denstar

unread,
Feb 7, 2015, 2:23:28 PM2/7/15
to lucee
On Sat, Feb 7, 2015 at 2:04 AM, Mark Drew wrote:
Heroku, docker, and all the other platforms are much more important that quibbling over the servlet container. 

Your questions below were more about what I was after, I just got wrapped up in a "what color should the car be" loop, which happens to the best of us. :)

I'll spawn a new thread to address the names of the packages, and the multi vs. single vs. shared jar vs. mod_cfml errata.

Naming cars is more fun that picking their colors!

-Den
 

Risto

unread,
Feb 7, 2015, 2:34:37 PM2/7/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com, lu...@sorcerersisle.com
My suggestion on downloads page would be to have container(major version) in express file name for both express. That would be nice and clear

Something like

lucee-4.5.1.000-express-jetty9.zip
lucee-4.5.1.000-express-tomcat8.zip
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages