You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@geronimo.apache.org by Lin Sun <li...@gmail.com> on 2008/10/08 18:43:54 UTC
boilerplate vs. framework as required plugin for custom server assembly
Hi,
I have been looking at GERONIMO-4226 today.
For a while, we have been recommending users to pick boilerplate as a
required plugin when assembling a custom server, in order to get a
working server. However, this working server isn't really working,
as a user won't be able to start the server using gshell (see G4226).
I am proposing to recommend users to pick the framework plugin group
(org.apache.geronimo.plugingroups/framework/2.2-SNAPSHOT/car) as the
required plugin when assembling a custom server, in order to get a
working server. I don't think this is possible with 2.1.x releases
as the framework plugin group doesn't exist there. Any issue with
that? If no, I'll update our code and user docs.
Lin
Re: boilerplate vs. framework as required plugin for custom server assembly
Posted by David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com>.
On Oct 14, 2008, at 6:27 AM, Donald Woods wrote:
> I believe there are too many c-m-p and plugin/pluginprofile changes/
> additions to warrant adding this into the 2.1 maintenance stream.
I agree wholeheartedly.
david jencks
>
>
>
> -Donald
>
>
> Jack Cai wrote:
>> Hi Lin,
>> Can we create the framework plugin group for 2.1.x too if this does
>> not take too much? Thanks in advance!
>> Jack
>> 2008/10/9 Lin Sun <linsun.unc@gmail.com
>> <ma...@gmail.com>>
>> Hi,
>> I have been looking at GERONIMO-4226 today.
>> For a while, we have been recommending users to pick boilerplate
>> as a
>> required plugin when assembling a custom server, in order to get a
>> working server. However, this working server isn't really
>> working,
>> as a user won't be able to start the server using gshell (see
>> G4226).
>> I am proposing to recommend users to pick the framework plugin
>> group
>> (org.apache.geronimo.plugingroups/framework/2.2-SNAPSHOT/car) as
>> the
>> required plugin when assembling a custom server, in order to get a
>> working server. I don't think this is possible with 2.1.x
>> releases
>> as the framework plugin group doesn't exist there. Any issue
>> with
>> that? If no, I'll update our code and user docs.
>> Lin
Re: boilerplate vs. framework as required plugin for custom server assembly
Posted by Lin Sun <li...@gmail.com>.
Yea I agree. I think it will be a lot of working to pulling them into
2.1 branch thus I don't intend to do so.
Lin
On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 9:27 AM, Donald Woods <dw...@apache.org> wrote:
> I believe there are too many c-m-p and plugin/pluginprofile
> changes/additions to warrant adding this into the 2.1 maintenance stream.
>
>
> -Donald
>
>
> Jack Cai wrote:
>>
>> Hi Lin,
>>
>> Can we create the framework plugin group for 2.1.x too if this does not
>> take too much? Thanks in advance!
>>
>> Jack
>>
>> 2008/10/9 Lin Sun <linsun.unc@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>>
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have been looking at GERONIMO-4226 today.
>>
>> For a while, we have been recommending users to pick boilerplate as a
>> required plugin when assembling a custom server, in order to get a
>> working server. However, this working server isn't really working,
>> as a user won't be able to start the server using gshell (see G4226).
>>
>> I am proposing to recommend users to pick the framework plugin group
>> (org.apache.geronimo.plugingroups/framework/2.2-SNAPSHOT/car) as the
>> required plugin when assembling a custom server, in order to get a
>> working server. I don't think this is possible with 2.1.x releases
>> as the framework plugin group doesn't exist there. Any issue with
>> that? If no, I'll update our code and user docs.
>>
>> Lin
>>
>>
>
Re: boilerplate vs. framework as required plugin for custom server
assembly
Posted by Donald Woods <dw...@apache.org>.
I believe there are too many c-m-p and plugin/pluginprofile
changes/additions to warrant adding this into the 2.1 maintenance stream.
-Donald
Jack Cai wrote:
> Hi Lin,
>
> Can we create the framework plugin group for 2.1.x too if this does not
> take too much? Thanks in advance!
>
> Jack
>
> 2008/10/9 Lin Sun <linsun.unc@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>>
>
> Hi,
>
> I have been looking at GERONIMO-4226 today.
>
> For a while, we have been recommending users to pick boilerplate as a
> required plugin when assembling a custom server, in order to get a
> working server. However, this working server isn't really working,
> as a user won't be able to start the server using gshell (see G4226).
>
> I am proposing to recommend users to pick the framework plugin group
> (org.apache.geronimo.plugingroups/framework/2.2-SNAPSHOT/car) as the
> required plugin when assembling a custom server, in order to get a
> working server. I don't think this is possible with 2.1.x releases
> as the framework plugin group doesn't exist there. Any issue with
> that? If no, I'll update our code and user docs.
>
> Lin
>
>
Re: boilerplate vs. framework as required plugin for custom server assembly
Posted by Jack Cai <gr...@gmail.com>.
Hi Lin,
Can we create the framework plugin group for 2.1.x too if this does not take
too much? Thanks in advance!
Jack
2008/10/9 Lin Sun <li...@gmail.com>
> Hi,
>
> I have been looking at GERONIMO-4226 today.
>
> For a while, we have been recommending users to pick boilerplate as a
> required plugin when assembling a custom server, in order to get a
> working server. However, this working server isn't really working,
> as a user won't be able to start the server using gshell (see G4226).
>
> I am proposing to recommend users to pick the framework plugin group
> (org.apache.geronimo.plugingroups/framework/2.2-SNAPSHOT/car) as the
> required plugin when assembling a custom server, in order to get a
> working server. I don't think this is possible with 2.1.x releases
> as the framework plugin group doesn't exist there. Any issue with
> that? If no, I'll update our code and user docs.
>
> Lin
>
Re: boilerplate vs. framework as required plugin for custom server assembly
Posted by David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com>.
On Oct 8, 2008, at 9:43 AM, Lin Sun wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have been looking at GERONIMO-4226 today.
>
> For a while, we have been recommending users to pick boilerplate as a
> required plugin when assembling a custom server, in order to get a
> working server. However, this working server isn't really working,
> as a user won't be able to start the server using gshell (see G4226).
>
> I am proposing to recommend users to pick the framework plugin group
> (org.apache.geronimo.plugingroups/framework/2.2-SNAPSHOT/car) as the
> required plugin when assembling a custom server, in order to get a
> working server. I don't think this is possible with 2.1.x releases
> as the framework plugin group doesn't exist there. Any issue with
> that? If no, I'll update our code and user docs.
I agree, this was my (IIRC not expressed) intention when originally
thinking about the framework plugin group. I think it's used this way
in all our assemblies already.
thanks for picking this up.... it fell off my radar.
david jencks
>
>
> Lin