You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@geronimo.apache.org by "David H. DeWolf" <dd...@apache.org> on 2005/12/09 03:58:13 UTC
[WEBCONSOLE] Start Playing with Pluto 1.1?
The Pluto team is preparing to release pluto-1.1-ALPHA. In addition to
simplifying the container to be much easier to embed and customize, we
have added support for runtime portlet deployment. I understand that
this is something that you guys might be interested in.
I have begun looking at your webconsole and think plugging in 1.1 should
be pretty simple. If you're interested, I'd love to work with some of
you at ApacheCon and help you get upgraded.
Let me know,
David
Re: [WEBCONSOLE] Start Playing with Pluto 1.1?
Posted by "David H. DeWolf" <dd...@apache.org>.
On 12/16/05, Dain Sundstrom <da...@iq80.com> wrote:
> Sorry for the confusion I have created.
>
No problem! It's a good thing that we consider all of the options. . .
> I did talk to Dave Taylor about using J2 in Geronimo for the
> console. The vision for Geronimo and the console has been to support
> downloadable plugins to enhance the server. For example, you may
> want to download a commerce extension for geronimo that processes
> payments for your web application. This could come from an open
> source project (using some yet to be defined open payment spec) or a
> commercial vendor. With the plugin you would get the jar containing
> the plugin classes, and a portlet that we would mount into our
> console for configuration and management of the plugin.
>
> This is why I believed that we need J2 since FWIU the version pluto
> we use doesn't support dynamic addition of portlets. I also think
> that we want our console to be skinnable, so ISVs embedding Geronimo
> into their apps can brand the console to their product.
>
> Is this stuff planned for Pluto? I really like the simplicity of
> Pluto especially for a console, that you need to work when things are
> going wrong in the server.
Dynamic addition of portlets has allready been added to 1.1 and can
definately be expanded if neeed. The ui layer is currently very
simple so no skinning exists. . .if we can talk about what is needed
then we could definately consider supporting whatever you require.
>
> One other question, does Pluto work well when other portal systems
> are installed into the server? I could see us using Pluto for our
> console, and J2 for the user land portal.
I wouldn't imagine any issues running both pluto and jetspeed together
- and if we encountered any, I would definately think it would be a
high priority to fix it. I really like the idea of Pluto for the
console and J2 as an embedded (optional) portal server for end user
support.
>
> -dain
>
> On Dec 15, 2005, at 11:39 AM, David H. DeWolf wrote:
>
> > Unfortunately, no. Between the geronimo release and several portals
> > discussions that I ended up getting involved in, I was never able to
> > follow through (though I did get to meet Aaron breifly).
> >
> > Part of our portals discussions were that the jetspeed guys really
> > want jetspeed to be the portal embedded within Geronimo. I believe
> > that Dain had some conversations with David Sean Taylor about that
> > approach.
> > It's my understanding that DST is going to start working on a scaled
> > down version of jetspeed.
> >
> > My humble opinion is that Pluto is more light weight and can easily
> > meet what is needed for the future with a couple of tweeks. There are
> > also advantages to jetspeed such as the fact that it has a more
> > vibrant community (in fact, one of the reasons I like the idea of
> > embedding pluto in geronimo and felix is my hope that it will help
> > spur interest in pluto).
> >
> > What are the geronimo developer's thoughts? Are you leaning towards
> > pluto or jetspeed?
> >
> > I'm still VERY interested in helping with this effort, so no matter
> > what the approach I'd like to be involved. I've just started
> > translating your current configurations into pluto 1.1 configuration
> > and hope to have it up and running today.
> >
> > The only hiccup I'll have to get through is that it seems as though
> > building and running G from source has changed since that last time I
> > did it. TI can't find the modules/assembly distribution which I used
> > to use and the wiki still references. Any hints or updated
> > documentation I should be looking at?
> >
> > David
> >
> >
> > On 12/15/05, Joe Bohn <jo...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >> Was this discussed at ApacheCon and was some groundwork laid? If so,
> >> can somebody please post the results here?
> >>
> >> Was there any discussion of moving Pluto out from the console web
> >> app to
> >> be a base Geronimo component (like the Servlet or EJB containers)?
> >> This would make it possible for Geronimo to host end user
> >> portals. Any
> >> discussion about the advantages/disadvantages of switching from the
> >> Pluto Portal to something like JetSpeed2?
> >>
> >> I'm very interested in helping with this effort and perhaps
> >> simplifying
> >> the console build/packaging structure as we upgrade the Portal and
> >> possibly extend support for user portals.
> >>
> >> Joe
> >>
> >> Aaron Mulder wrote:
> >>> Sounds great to me, but I'm probably not going to have a ton of time
> >>> to work on this in the immediate future on account of getting 1.0
> >>> out
> >>> the door and so on. I'd love to at least talk at ApacheCon and lay
> >>> the groundwork for moving forward with Pluto 1.1 for the next
> >>> Geronimo
> >>> version.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Aaron
> >>>
> >>> On 12/8/05, David H. DeWolf <dd...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> The Pluto team is preparing to release pluto-1.1-ALPHA. In
> >>>> addition to
> >>>> simplifying the container to be much easier to embed and
> >>>> customize, we
> >>>> have added support for runtime portlet deployment. I understand
> >>>> that
> >>>> this is something that you guys might be interested in.
> >>>>
> >>>> I have begun looking at your webconsole and think plugging in
> >>>> 1.1 should
> >>>> be pretty simple. If you're interested, I'd love to work with
> >>>> some of
> >>>> you at ApacheCon and help you get upgraded.
> >>>>
> >>>> Let me know,
> >>>>
> >>>> David
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Joe Bohn
> >> joe.bohn@earthlink.net
> >>
> >> "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep, to gain what he cannot
> >> lose." -- Jim Elliot
> >>
>
>
Re: [WEBCONSOLE] Start Playing with Pluto 1.1?
Posted by Joe Bohn <jo...@earthlink.net>.
Dain Sundstrom wrote:
<snip>
> One other question, does Pluto work well when other portal systems are
> installed into the server? I could see us using Pluto for our console,
> and J2 for the user land portal.
>
> -dain
I think this is possible, but I wonder if it is worth the resource
consumption and complexity to have multiple portal servers in the same
Geronimo server. In addition to the resource consumption, keeping the
web console portal independent of the user portal limits the ability for
a user to integrate portlets from their business applications and
Geronimo admin. A system administrator might want to manage their
payroll system and their web applications from single user interface.
I think it would be fine to offer lexibility in the portal server that a
user chooses to include in G. However, if the user has chosen to use J2
then I think it makes sense for the web console to use this as well
rather than including another Portal server (Pluto) in the image.
just my 2 cents
--
Joe Bohn
joe.bohn@earthlink.net
"He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep, to gain what he cannot
lose." -- Jim Elliot
Re: [WEBCONSOLE] Start Playing with Pluto 1.1?
Posted by Dain Sundstrom <da...@iq80.com>.
Sorry for the confusion I have created.
I did talk to Dave Taylor about using J2 in Geronimo for the
console. The vision for Geronimo and the console has been to support
downloadable plugins to enhance the server. For example, you may
want to download a commerce extension for geronimo that processes
payments for your web application. This could come from an open
source project (using some yet to be defined open payment spec) or a
commercial vendor. With the plugin you would get the jar containing
the plugin classes, and a portlet that we would mount into our
console for configuration and management of the plugin.
This is why I believed that we need J2 since FWIU the version pluto
we use doesn't support dynamic addition of portlets. I also think
that we want our console to be skinnable, so ISVs embedding Geronimo
into their apps can brand the console to their product.
Is this stuff planned for Pluto? I really like the simplicity of
Pluto especially for a console, that you need to work when things are
going wrong in the server.
One other question, does Pluto work well when other portal systems
are installed into the server? I could see us using Pluto for our
console, and J2 for the user land portal.
-dain
On Dec 15, 2005, at 11:39 AM, David H. DeWolf wrote:
> Unfortunately, no. Between the geronimo release and several portals
> discussions that I ended up getting involved in, I was never able to
> follow through (though I did get to meet Aaron breifly).
>
> Part of our portals discussions were that the jetspeed guys really
> want jetspeed to be the portal embedded within Geronimo. I believe
> that Dain had some conversations with David Sean Taylor about that
> approach.
> It's my understanding that DST is going to start working on a scaled
> down version of jetspeed.
>
> My humble opinion is that Pluto is more light weight and can easily
> meet what is needed for the future with a couple of tweeks. There are
> also advantages to jetspeed such as the fact that it has a more
> vibrant community (in fact, one of the reasons I like the idea of
> embedding pluto in geronimo and felix is my hope that it will help
> spur interest in pluto).
>
> What are the geronimo developer's thoughts? Are you leaning towards
> pluto or jetspeed?
>
> I'm still VERY interested in helping with this effort, so no matter
> what the approach I'd like to be involved. I've just started
> translating your current configurations into pluto 1.1 configuration
> and hope to have it up and running today.
>
> The only hiccup I'll have to get through is that it seems as though
> building and running G from source has changed since that last time I
> did it. TI can't find the modules/assembly distribution which I used
> to use and the wiki still references. Any hints or updated
> documentation I should be looking at?
>
> David
>
>
> On 12/15/05, Joe Bohn <jo...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>> Was this discussed at ApacheCon and was some groundwork laid? If so,
>> can somebody please post the results here?
>>
>> Was there any discussion of moving Pluto out from the console web
>> app to
>> be a base Geronimo component (like the Servlet or EJB containers)?
>> This would make it possible for Geronimo to host end user
>> portals. Any
>> discussion about the advantages/disadvantages of switching from the
>> Pluto Portal to something like JetSpeed2?
>>
>> I'm very interested in helping with this effort and perhaps
>> simplifying
>> the console build/packaging structure as we upgrade the Portal and
>> possibly extend support for user portals.
>>
>> Joe
>>
>> Aaron Mulder wrote:
>>> Sounds great to me, but I'm probably not going to have a ton of time
>>> to work on this in the immediate future on account of getting 1.0
>>> out
>>> the door and so on. I'd love to at least talk at ApacheCon and lay
>>> the groundwork for moving forward with Pluto 1.1 for the next
>>> Geronimo
>>> version.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Aaron
>>>
>>> On 12/8/05, David H. DeWolf <dd...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> The Pluto team is preparing to release pluto-1.1-ALPHA. In
>>>> addition to
>>>> simplifying the container to be much easier to embed and
>>>> customize, we
>>>> have added support for runtime portlet deployment. I understand
>>>> that
>>>> this is something that you guys might be interested in.
>>>>
>>>> I have begun looking at your webconsole and think plugging in
>>>> 1.1 should
>>>> be pretty simple. If you're interested, I'd love to work with
>>>> some of
>>>> you at ApacheCon and help you get upgraded.
>>>>
>>>> Let me know,
>>>>
>>>> David
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Joe Bohn
>> joe.bohn@earthlink.net
>>
>> "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep, to gain what he cannot
>> lose." -- Jim Elliot
>>
Re: [WEBCONSOLE] Start Playing with Pluto 1.1?
Posted by Joe Bohn <jo...@earthlink.net>.
David,
Thanks for your response. I'd like to hear the thoughts of others but I
know that I've been leaning toward JetSpeed primarily because it was my
impression that the Pluto Portal was more of a simple portal for
development or light-weight portal apps. and not really intended for an
enterprise portal. I suspect that many of our portal users would want a
solution that can scale in the enterprise and include features such as
cluster support.
No matter what we decide, my personal opinion is that we need to get a
portal server as a component of Geronimo and not just included as part
of of the web console application.
Yes, the build processing and assembly structure have changed in the
last few weeks. There are now two Geronimo images (one for tomcat and
one for jetty) under assemblies/j2ee-tomcat-server and
assemblies/j2ee-jetty-server. To build from the Geronimo root I
typically use the following command initially and then do off-line (-o)
builds as I continue to work with the same image:
maven m:clean new -Dmaven.test.skip=true -Dmaven.itest.skip=true
Thanks,
Joe
David H. DeWolf wrote:
> Unfortunately, no. Between the geronimo release and several portals
> discussions that I ended up getting involved in, I was never able to
> follow through (though I did get to meet Aaron breifly).
>
> Part of our portals discussions were that the jetspeed guys really
> want jetspeed to be the portal embedded within Geronimo. I believe
> that Dain had some conversations with David Sean Taylor about that
> approach.
> It's my understanding that DST is going to start working on a scaled
> down version of jetspeed.
>
> My humble opinion is that Pluto is more light weight and can easily
> meet what is needed for the future with a couple of tweeks. There are
> also advantages to jetspeed such as the fact that it has a more
> vibrant community (in fact, one of the reasons I like the idea of
> embedding pluto in geronimo and felix is my hope that it will help
> spur interest in pluto).
>
> What are the geronimo developer's thoughts? Are you leaning towards
> pluto or jetspeed?
>
> I'm still VERY interested in helping with this effort, so no matter
> what the approach I'd like to be involved. I've just started
> translating your current configurations into pluto 1.1 configuration
> and hope to have it up and running today.
>
> The only hiccup I'll have to get through is that it seems as though
> building and running G from source has changed since that last time I
> did it. TI can't find the modules/assembly distribution which I used
> to use and the wiki still references. Any hints or updated
> documentation I should be looking at?
>
> David
>
>
> On 12/15/05, Joe Bohn <jo...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>>Was this discussed at ApacheCon and was some groundwork laid? If so,
>>can somebody please post the results here?
>>
>>Was there any discussion of moving Pluto out from the console web app to
>>be a base Geronimo component (like the Servlet or EJB containers)?
>>This would make it possible for Geronimo to host end user portals. Any
>>discussion about the advantages/disadvantages of switching from the
>>Pluto Portal to something like JetSpeed2?
>>
>>I'm very interested in helping with this effort and perhaps simplifying
>>the console build/packaging structure as we upgrade the Portal and
>>possibly extend support for user portals.
>>
>>Joe
>>
>>Aaron Mulder wrote:
>>
>>>Sounds great to me, but I'm probably not going to have a ton of time
>>>to work on this in the immediate future on account of getting 1.0 out
>>>the door and so on. I'd love to at least talk at ApacheCon and lay
>>>the groundwork for moving forward with Pluto 1.1 for the next Geronimo
>>>version.
>>>
>>>Thanks,
>>> Aaron
>>>
>>>On 12/8/05, David H. DeWolf <dd...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>The Pluto team is preparing to release pluto-1.1-ALPHA. In addition to
>>>>simplifying the container to be much easier to embed and customize, we
>>>>have added support for runtime portlet deployment. I understand that
>>>>this is something that you guys might be interested in.
>>>>
>>>>I have begun looking at your webconsole and think plugging in 1.1 should
>>>>be pretty simple. If you're interested, I'd love to work with some of
>>>>you at ApacheCon and help you get upgraded.
>>>>
>>>>Let me know,
>>>>
>>>>David
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>--
>>Joe Bohn
>>joe.bohn@earthlink.net
>>
>>"He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep, to gain what he cannot
>>lose." -- Jim Elliot
>>
>
>
>
--
Joe Bohn
joe.bohn@earthlink.net
"He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep, to gain what he cannot
lose." -- Jim Elliot
Re: [WEBCONSOLE] Start Playing with Pluto 1.1?
Posted by "David H. DeWolf" <dd...@apache.org>.
Unfortunately, no. Between the geronimo release and several portals
discussions that I ended up getting involved in, I was never able to
follow through (though I did get to meet Aaron breifly).
Part of our portals discussions were that the jetspeed guys really
want jetspeed to be the portal embedded within Geronimo. I believe
that Dain had some conversations with David Sean Taylor about that
approach.
It's my understanding that DST is going to start working on a scaled
down version of jetspeed.
My humble opinion is that Pluto is more light weight and can easily
meet what is needed for the future with a couple of tweeks. There are
also advantages to jetspeed such as the fact that it has a more
vibrant community (in fact, one of the reasons I like the idea of
embedding pluto in geronimo and felix is my hope that it will help
spur interest in pluto).
What are the geronimo developer's thoughts? Are you leaning towards
pluto or jetspeed?
I'm still VERY interested in helping with this effort, so no matter
what the approach I'd like to be involved. I've just started
translating your current configurations into pluto 1.1 configuration
and hope to have it up and running today.
The only hiccup I'll have to get through is that it seems as though
building and running G from source has changed since that last time I
did it. TI can't find the modules/assembly distribution which I used
to use and the wiki still references. Any hints or updated
documentation I should be looking at?
David
On 12/15/05, Joe Bohn <jo...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> Was this discussed at ApacheCon and was some groundwork laid? If so,
> can somebody please post the results here?
>
> Was there any discussion of moving Pluto out from the console web app to
> be a base Geronimo component (like the Servlet or EJB containers)?
> This would make it possible for Geronimo to host end user portals. Any
> discussion about the advantages/disadvantages of switching from the
> Pluto Portal to something like JetSpeed2?
>
> I'm very interested in helping with this effort and perhaps simplifying
> the console build/packaging structure as we upgrade the Portal and
> possibly extend support for user portals.
>
> Joe
>
> Aaron Mulder wrote:
> > Sounds great to me, but I'm probably not going to have a ton of time
> > to work on this in the immediate future on account of getting 1.0 out
> > the door and so on. I'd love to at least talk at ApacheCon and lay
> > the groundwork for moving forward with Pluto 1.1 for the next Geronimo
> > version.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Aaron
> >
> > On 12/8/05, David H. DeWolf <dd...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >>The Pluto team is preparing to release pluto-1.1-ALPHA. In addition to
> >>simplifying the container to be much easier to embed and customize, we
> >>have added support for runtime portlet deployment. I understand that
> >>this is something that you guys might be interested in.
> >>
> >>I have begun looking at your webconsole and think plugging in 1.1 should
> >>be pretty simple. If you're interested, I'd love to work with some of
> >>you at ApacheCon and help you get upgraded.
> >>
> >>Let me know,
> >>
> >>David
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> Joe Bohn
> joe.bohn@earthlink.net
>
> "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep, to gain what he cannot
> lose." -- Jim Elliot
>
Re: [WEBCONSOLE] Start Playing with Pluto 1.1?
Posted by Joe Bohn <jo...@earthlink.net>.
Was this discussed at ApacheCon and was some groundwork laid? If so,
can somebody please post the results here?
Was there any discussion of moving Pluto out from the console web app to
be a base Geronimo component (like the Servlet or EJB containers)?
This would make it possible for Geronimo to host end user portals. Any
discussion about the advantages/disadvantages of switching from the
Pluto Portal to something like JetSpeed2?
I'm very interested in helping with this effort and perhaps simplifying
the console build/packaging structure as we upgrade the Portal and
possibly extend support for user portals.
Joe
Aaron Mulder wrote:
> Sounds great to me, but I'm probably not going to have a ton of time
> to work on this in the immediate future on account of getting 1.0 out
> the door and so on. I'd love to at least talk at ApacheCon and lay
> the groundwork for moving forward with Pluto 1.1 for the next Geronimo
> version.
>
> Thanks,
> Aaron
>
> On 12/8/05, David H. DeWolf <dd...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>>The Pluto team is preparing to release pluto-1.1-ALPHA. In addition to
>>simplifying the container to be much easier to embed and customize, we
>>have added support for runtime portlet deployment. I understand that
>>this is something that you guys might be interested in.
>>
>>I have begun looking at your webconsole and think plugging in 1.1 should
>>be pretty simple. If you're interested, I'd love to work with some of
>>you at ApacheCon and help you get upgraded.
>>
>>Let me know,
>>
>>David
>>
>>
>
>
>
--
Joe Bohn
joe.bohn@earthlink.net
"He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep, to gain what he cannot
lose." -- Jim Elliot
Re: [WEBCONSOLE] Start Playing with Pluto 1.1?
Posted by Aaron Mulder <am...@alumni.princeton.edu>.
Sounds great to me, but I'm probably not going to have a ton of time
to work on this in the immediate future on account of getting 1.0 out
the door and so on. I'd love to at least talk at ApacheCon and lay
the groundwork for moving forward with Pluto 1.1 for the next Geronimo
version.
Thanks,
Aaron
On 12/8/05, David H. DeWolf <dd...@apache.org> wrote:
> The Pluto team is preparing to release pluto-1.1-ALPHA. In addition to
> simplifying the container to be much easier to embed and customize, we
> have added support for runtime portlet deployment. I understand that
> this is something that you guys might be interested in.
>
> I have begun looking at your webconsole and think plugging in 1.1 should
> be pretty simple. If you're interested, I'd love to work with some of
> you at ApacheCon and help you get upgraded.
>
> Let me know,
>
> David
>
>