Created attachment 162672 [details] SHAR file. Hi, I've put together a new port for Jetty 9. This superceeds the EOL'ed version of 8.1.15 currently found in the ports www/jetty directory. I look forward to feedback on it :-) -=david=-
Can you check for the same plist issues as with bug 204128. Non-changing content in LOCALBASE, owned by root:wheel whenever possible and variable files/dirs, possibly changing at runtime, in /var
Hi Thomas, A point about this one. Jetty recommends that user content is kept separate (jetty.base) which is configurable for each instance of a webapp deployed to Jetty. The jetty.base is self contained, in that it contains the log files, binary files etc., that makes up the webapp. Where this jetty.base is located is entirely up to the user, they may choose not to put it /var, but may put it, say /srv or /usr/local/www, or /raid/myapp. I make this clear in the pkg-message.in file. What would you suggest in this instance? (personally, I would treat this like an installation of, say, wordpress - I would create a jail, install jetty and just use the same directory that jetty installs into to deploy the jetty.base directory/files). Thank you. -=david=-
(In reply to David Harrigan from comment #2) Traditionally, there is WWWDIR where www server ports store their content, defaulting to ${PREFIX}/www/${PORTNAME} (see ${PORTSDIR}/Mk/bsd.port.mk) if the port does not set it to a specific value. Have a look at the apache or nginx ports for elaborate examples. If there are no technical reasons to do this differently, I'd say it's a sensible choice. The important part really is that we try to separate user content from package installation.
Created attachment 162935 [details] SHAR File Hi, Updates. I now move the demo directory into /usr/local/www/jetty. Updated installation message. There's a new version of Jetty out shortly (a few days). So, even although this can be tested and feedback given, I'll wait until 9.3.6 is out and use that as the version to use for installation. -=david=-
(In reply to David Harrigan from comment #4) Fantastic ... sometimes reading twice helps. It seems I have overlooked your remark that jetty 8 is EOL'd. If so, it would make much more sense not to introduce www/jetty9. Instead you should update the www/jetty port to a recent upstream version and submit a patch (in a new bug report) instead of a new port.
Hi, Thank you Thomas for your feedback. I'm not too sure I can do that. You see, there are lots of people out there still running with Jetty 8, since it runs with Java 8 and below. However, Jetty 9 only works with Java 8 or above. Therefore, Jetty9 is altogether different. I can (of course) do a patch for www/jetty to bring it up to the supported version of 9.2.13 (Java 7 and below). But www/jetty9 is for Java 8 and above only. I hope that clarifies :-) -=david=-
(In reply to David Harrigan from comment #6)
(In reply to David Harrigan from comment #6) Just added olgeni@ , the jetty maintainer to CC. @olgeni: What do you think? Should we get a jetty9 port or update the existing jetty port?
Created attachment 163256 [details] SHAR File Hi, This is the latest SHAR file that brings Jetty 9 up to the latest version of 9.3.6.v20151106. This is the current version that I would intend to release as Jetty9 port. Please can this be considered for inclusion within the ports tree. Thank you. -=david=-
(In reply to Thomas Zander from comment #8) I'd say to move www/jetty to www/jetty8, then add www/jetty9. People with the current www/jetty will stay on 8 unless they upgrade to www/jetty9 and avoid surprises. I'll have a look at this ASAP.
Hi, I think this is a great idea - it would enable those running Jetty 8 to continue if they are using Java 8, 7, 6 etc, and for those running Java 8 (or above!) to run with Jetty 9! Thank you - If there is anything I can do, please let me know. -=david=-
OK Jimmy, then it's best for you to take over.
A commit references this bug: Author: olgeni Date: Sun Dec 6 20:12:59 UTC 2015 New revision: 403154 URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/ports/403154 Log: Add support for Jetty 9. - Add www/jetty9 to track the latest branch of Jetty - Move www/jetty to www/jetty8 - Add LICENSE and fix RUN_DEPENDS in www/jetty8 www/jetty8 is officially EOL'd upstream but still seems to be in use. PR: 204190 Submitted by: David Harrigan Changes: head/MOVED head/www/Makefile head/www/jetty/ head/www/jetty8/ head/www/jetty8/Makefile head/www/jetty8/files/jetty.in head/www/jetty9/ head/www/jetty9/Makefile head/www/jetty9/distinfo head/www/jetty9/files/jetty.in head/www/jetty9/files/jetty.sample.in head/www/jetty9/files/jettyctl.in head/www/jetty9/files/message-advanced.in head/www/jetty9/files/message.in head/www/jetty9/files/patch-bin_jetty.sh head/www/jetty9/files/pkg-deinstall.in head/www/jetty9/files/pkg-install.in head/www/jetty9/files/pkg-message.in head/www/jetty9/pkg-plist
*** Bug 202720 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***