You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@geronimo.apache.org by Joe Bohn <jo...@earthlink.net> on 2008/06/10 06:01:23 UTC
[DISCUSS] Server Respository plugin for Geronimo 2.1+ - RC2
Start of thread to discuss any concerns/issues/questions with the vote
for the Server Repository plugin for Geronimo 2.1+
Joe
Re: [DISCUSS] Server Respository plugin for Geronimo 2.1+ - RC2
Posted by Lin Sun <li...@gmail.com>.
Hi Joe, thanks for your reply! This makes perfect sense as the plugin
is intended to support multiple G versions! Sorry I don't mean to
delay this call - I just want to look at the source code and make sure
I am looking at the right stuff! Enjoy your vacation!
Lin
On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 9:25 AM, Joe Bohn <jo...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> Lin Sun wrote:
>>
>> Sorry for not being clear here - I think I am looking for the
>> corresponding source code that supports this plugin (which seems to be
>> org.apache.geronimo.system.repository.Maven2Repository +
>> org.apache.geronimo.system.configuration.RepositoryConfigurationStore).
>> Should I look at the trunk version of the code or is there a
>> specific svn pointer for this vote?
>
> Lin,
>
> The repository and configuration code isn't up for vote. Those are included
> and used in the server itself. This vote is just to deliver a secondary
> repository configuration (plugin) which leverages the same modules already
> used in the server. The exact source for these modules can be found with
> the source for the server. For example, in Geronimo 2.1.1 you can find the
> source here:
>
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/server/tags/2.1.1/framework/modules/geronimo-system/src/main/java/org/apache/geronimo/system/repository/Maven2Repository.java
> and
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/server/tags/2.1.1/framework/modules/geronimo-system/src/main/java/org/apache/geronimo/system/configuration/RepositoryConfigurationStore.java
>
> Also .... I'm sorry for being a bit unresponsive. I'm on vacation and have
> very limited network access (and that just for today). I was actually
> signing on now to call the vote. Is there some reason that we should delay
> this call? I'll check back later on to see if there are any other
> responses.
>
> Joe
>
>
>>
>> Thx, Lin
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 5:52 PM, David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> The plan and pom are all that is needed to build a plugin. Some plugins
>>> that include code also include an unpacked javaee app, but even these
>>> don't
>>> have any code. Sometimes some resources might be included.
>>>
>>> thanks
>>> david jencks
>>>
>>> On Jun 12, 2008, at 2:30 PM, Lin Sun wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hmm don't really see any code in the svn pointer other than a
>>>> plan.xml. Am I missing something obvious?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks, Lin
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 5:06 PM, Kevan Miller <ke...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Jun 12, 2008, at 4:46 PM, Lin Sun wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Joe,
>>>>>
>>>>> This might be obvious but where is the source code for this? I
>>>>> downloaded the server-repo-1.0-sources.jar from your staging repo
>>>>> link but I don't see any java code there.
>>>>>
>>>>> svn pointer should definitely be included in any vote...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/plugins/server-repo/tags/server-repo-1.0
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>
>>>>> Lin
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 12:01 AM, Joe Bohn <jo...@earthlink.net>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Start of thread to discuss any concerns/issues/questions with the vote
>>>>> for
>>>>>
>>>>> the Server Repository plugin for Geronimo 2.1+
>>>>>
>>>>> Joe
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Server Respository plugin for Geronimo 2.1+ - RC2
Posted by Joe Bohn <jo...@earthlink.net>.
Lin Sun wrote:
> Sorry for not being clear here - I think I am looking for the
> corresponding source code that supports this plugin (which seems to be
> org.apache.geronimo.system.repository.Maven2Repository +
> org.apache.geronimo.system.configuration.RepositoryConfigurationStore).
> Should I look at the trunk version of the code or is there a
> specific svn pointer for this vote?
Lin,
The repository and configuration code isn't up for vote. Those are
included and used in the server itself. This vote is just to deliver a
secondary repository configuration (plugin) which leverages the same
modules already used in the server. The exact source for these modules
can be found with the source for the server. For example, in Geronimo
2.1.1 you can find the source here:
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/server/tags/2.1.1/framework/modules/geronimo-system/src/main/java/org/apache/geronimo/system/repository/Maven2Repository.java
and
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/server/tags/2.1.1/framework/modules/geronimo-system/src/main/java/org/apache/geronimo/system/configuration/RepositoryConfigurationStore.java
Also .... I'm sorry for being a bit unresponsive. I'm on vacation and
have very limited network access (and that just for today). I was
actually signing on now to call the vote. Is there some reason that we
should delay this call? I'll check back later on to see if there are
any other responses.
Joe
>
> Thx, Lin
>
> On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 5:52 PM, David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> The plan and pom are all that is needed to build a plugin. Some plugins
>> that include code also include an unpacked javaee app, but even these don't
>> have any code. Sometimes some resources might be included.
>>
>> thanks
>> david jencks
>>
>> On Jun 12, 2008, at 2:30 PM, Lin Sun wrote:
>>
>>> Hmm don't really see any code in the svn pointer other than a
>>> plan.xml. Am I missing something obvious?
>>>
>>> Thanks, Lin
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 5:06 PM, Kevan Miller <ke...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> On Jun 12, 2008, at 4:46 PM, Lin Sun wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Joe,
>>>>
>>>> This might be obvious but where is the source code for this? I
>>>> downloaded the server-repo-1.0-sources.jar from your staging repo
>>>> link but I don't see any java code there.
>>>>
>>>> svn pointer should definitely be included in any vote...
>>>>
>>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/plugins/server-repo/tags/server-repo-1.0
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>> Lin
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 12:01 AM, Joe Bohn <jo...@earthlink.net>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Start of thread to discuss any concerns/issues/questions with the vote
>>>> for
>>>>
>>>> the Server Repository plugin for Geronimo 2.1+
>>>>
>>>> Joe
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Server Respository plugin for Geronimo 2.1+ - RC2
Posted by Lin Sun <li...@gmail.com>.
Sorry for not being clear here - I think I am looking for the
corresponding source code that supports this plugin (which seems to be
org.apache.geronimo.system.repository.Maven2Repository +
org.apache.geronimo.system.configuration.RepositoryConfigurationStore).
Should I look at the trunk version of the code or is there a
specific svn pointer for this vote?
Thx, Lin
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 5:52 PM, David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> The plan and pom are all that is needed to build a plugin. Some plugins
> that include code also include an unpacked javaee app, but even these don't
> have any code. Sometimes some resources might be included.
>
> thanks
> david jencks
>
> On Jun 12, 2008, at 2:30 PM, Lin Sun wrote:
>
>> Hmm don't really see any code in the svn pointer other than a
>> plan.xml. Am I missing something obvious?
>>
>> Thanks, Lin
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 5:06 PM, Kevan Miller <ke...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Jun 12, 2008, at 4:46 PM, Lin Sun wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Joe,
>>>
>>> This might be obvious but where is the source code for this? I
>>> downloaded the server-repo-1.0-sources.jar from your staging repo
>>> link but I don't see any java code there.
>>>
>>> svn pointer should definitely be included in any vote...
>>>
>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/plugins/server-repo/tags/server-repo-1.0
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Lin
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 12:01 AM, Joe Bohn <jo...@earthlink.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Start of thread to discuss any concerns/issues/questions with the vote
>>> for
>>>
>>> the Server Repository plugin for Geronimo 2.1+
>>>
>>> Joe
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Server Respository plugin for Geronimo 2.1+ - RC2
Posted by David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com>.
The plan and pom are all that is needed to build a plugin. Some
plugins that include code also include an unpacked javaee app, but
even these don't have any code. Sometimes some resources might be
included.
thanks
david jencks
On Jun 12, 2008, at 2:30 PM, Lin Sun wrote:
> Hmm don't really see any code in the svn pointer other than a
> plan.xml. Am I missing something obvious?
>
> Thanks, Lin
>
> On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 5:06 PM, Kevan Miller
> <ke...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Jun 12, 2008, at 4:46 PM, Lin Sun wrote:
>>
>> Hi Joe,
>>
>> This might be obvious but where is the source code for this? I
>> downloaded the server-repo-1.0-sources.jar from your staging repo
>> link but I don't see any java code there.
>>
>> svn pointer should definitely be included in any vote...
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/plugins/server-repo/tags/server-repo-1.0
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Lin
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 12:01 AM, Joe Bohn <jo...@earthlink.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Start of thread to discuss any concerns/issues/questions with the
>> vote for
>>
>> the Server Repository plugin for Geronimo 2.1+
>>
>> Joe
>>
>>
>>
Re: [DISCUSS] Server Respository plugin for Geronimo 2.1+ - RC2
Posted by Lin Sun <li...@gmail.com>.
Hmm don't really see any code in the svn pointer other than a
plan.xml. Am I missing something obvious?
Thanks, Lin
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 5:06 PM, Kevan Miller <ke...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Jun 12, 2008, at 4:46 PM, Lin Sun wrote:
>
> Hi Joe,
>
> This might be obvious but where is the source code for this? I
> downloaded the server-repo-1.0-sources.jar from your staging repo
> link but I don't see any java code there.
>
> svn pointer should definitely be included in any vote...
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/plugins/server-repo/tags/server-repo-1.0
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Lin
>
> On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 12:01 AM, Joe Bohn <jo...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> Start of thread to discuss any concerns/issues/questions with the vote for
>
> the Server Repository plugin for Geronimo 2.1+
>
> Joe
>
>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Server Respository plugin for Geronimo 2.1+ - RC2
Posted by Kevan Miller <ke...@gmail.com>.
On Jun 12, 2008, at 4:46 PM, Lin Sun wrote:
> Hi Joe,
>
> This might be obvious but where is the source code for this? I
> downloaded the server-repo-1.0-sources.jar from your staging repo
> link but I don't see any java code there.
svn pointer should definitely be included in any vote...
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/plugins/server-repo/tags/server-repo-1.0
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Lin
>
> On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 12:01 AM, Joe Bohn <jo...@earthlink.net>
> wrote:
>> Start of thread to discuss any concerns/issues/questions with the
>> vote for
>> the Server Repository plugin for Geronimo 2.1+
>>
>> Joe
>>
Re: [DISCUSS] Server Respository plugin for Geronimo 2.1+ - RC2
Posted by Lin Sun <li...@gmail.com>.
Hi Joe,
This might be obvious but where is the source code for this? I
downloaded the server-repo-1.0-sources.jar from your staging repo
link but I don't see any java code there.
Thanks,
Lin
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 12:01 AM, Joe Bohn <jo...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> Start of thread to discuss any concerns/issues/questions with the vote for
> the Server Repository plugin for Geronimo 2.1+
>
> Joe
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Server Respository plugin for Geronimo 2.1+ - RC2
Posted by Joe Bohn <jo...@earthlink.net>.
Hernan Cunico wrote:
> Joe Bohn wrote:
>> Lin Sun wrote:
>>> Hi Joe, any plan to update the multi-repo documentation to instruct
>>> users to install the sample plugin instead of deploy the
>>> server-repo.xml file manually?
>>>
>>> Thanks, Lin
>>>
>>
>> Yes, I was planning to update the doc to include the installing the
>> plugin once it was released. However, I was thinking of keeping the
>> manual process as well .... still hadn't decided on that yet.
>>
>> Joe
>>
> I would suggest we keep the manual process and then document the server
> repo plugin as part of the sample apps (which are all plugins(*)). Then
> we can reference to that section from the existing doc
No objection to keeping the manual process per say ... but this is not a
sample. Rather, it is a per server repository which can be used without
any modification by the end user. I think the description should remain
independent of the samples.
>
> (*) should we call the sample apps section sample plugins to give it a
> more representative title?
I think it would be a mistake to change the title from apps to plugins.
They are still applications as well as plugins and a user looking for
a sample will intuitively look for a sample application as the term
plugin might not have any meaning to them.
>
> Cheers!
> Hernan
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Server Respository plugin for Geronimo 2.1+ - RC2
Posted by Hernan Cunico <hc...@gmail.com>.
Joe Bohn wrote:
> Lin Sun wrote:
>> Hi Joe, any plan to update the multi-repo documentation to instruct
>> users to install the sample plugin instead of deploy the
>> server-repo.xml file manually?
>>
>> Thanks, Lin
>>
>
> Yes, I was planning to update the doc to include the installing the
> plugin once it was released. However, I was thinking of keeping the
> manual process as well .... still hadn't decided on that yet.
>
> Joe
>
I would suggest we keep the manual process and then document the server repo plugin as part of the sample apps (which are all plugins(*)). Then we can reference to that section from the existing doc
(*) should we call the sample apps section sample plugins to give it a more representative title?
Cheers!
Hernan
Re: [DISCUSS] Server Respository plugin for Geronimo 2.1+ - RC2
Posted by Joe Bohn <jo...@earthlink.net>.
Lin Sun wrote:
> Hi Joe, any plan to update the multi-repo documentation to instruct
> users to install the sample plugin instead of deploy the
> server-repo.xml file manually?
>
> Thanks, Lin
>
Yes, I was planning to update the doc to include the installing the
plugin once it was released. However, I was thinking of keeping the
manual process as well .... still hadn't decided on that yet.
Joe
Re: [DISCUSS] Server Respository plugin for Geronimo 2.1+ - RC2
Posted by Lin Sun <li...@gmail.com>.
Hi Joe, any plan to update the multi-repo documentation to instruct
users to install the sample plugin instead of deploy the
server-repo.xml file manually?
Thanks, Lin
Re: [DISCUSS] Server Respository plugin for Geronimo 2.1+ - RC2
Posted by Joe Bohn <jo...@earthlink.net>.
Kevan Miller wrote:
>
> On Jun 13, 2008, at 9:48 AM, Joe Bohn wrote:
>
>> Joe Bohn wrote:
>>> Start of thread to discuss any concerns/issues/questions with the
>>> vote for the Server Repository plugin for Geronimo 2.1+
>>> Joe
>>
>> Jarek posted an concern in his vote on this plugin:
>> Jarek Gawor wrote:
>> > +1
>> >
>> > One minor comment: when installing the plugin using the admin console
>> > it shows the license as:
>> >
>> > License: The Apache Software License, Version 2.0 (Proprietary)
>> >
>> > and should be :
>> >
>> > License: The Apache Software License, Version 2.0 (Open Source)
>>
>> As you can see, he still voted +1. However, this concerns me. I
>> guess there must be something that I need to set for the plugin in the
>> pom.xml to indicate that this is apache licensed. The generated
>> geronimo-plugin.xml includes <license osi-approved="false">The Apache
>> Software License, Version 2.0</license> rather than indicating true
>> for osi-approved.
>>
>> So ... what to do with the vote? I really don't like the erroneous
>> license message. I'm leaning toward cancelling the vote again to get
>> this fixed. What are your opinions?
>
> Personally, I'd like to see this fixed. How/where are we picking up the
> osi-approved value?
>
> --kevan
It looks like I just needed to include <osiApproved>true</osiApproved>
in the plugin configuration section of the pom for this plugin. I
omitted it so it must default to false.
As Lin pointed out, I can update this in the plugin catalog (and I just
did in my staging repo) ... which results in the correct license info
being displayed when installing the plugin from the console. However,
we usually depend upon these catalog being generated with only minor
edits. I guess we could consider this another minor edit but it would
be nice to have it generate correctly.
If you attempt to install from my staging repo now (with the edit) it
will indicate it is open source licensed.
Joe
Re: [DISCUSS] Server Respository plugin for Geronimo 2.1+ - RC2
Posted by Kevan Miller <ke...@gmail.com>.
On Jun 13, 2008, at 9:48 AM, Joe Bohn wrote:
> Joe Bohn wrote:
>> Start of thread to discuss any concerns/issues/questions with the
>> vote for the Server Repository plugin for Geronimo 2.1+
>> Joe
>
> Jarek posted an concern in his vote on this plugin:
> Jarek Gawor wrote:
> > +1
> >
> > One minor comment: when installing the plugin using the admin
> console
> > it shows the license as:
> >
> > License: The Apache Software License, Version 2.0 (Proprietary)
> >
> > and should be :
> >
> > License: The Apache Software License, Version 2.0 (Open Source)
>
> As you can see, he still voted +1. However, this concerns me. I
> guess there must be something that I need to set for the plugin in
> the pom.xml to indicate that this is apache licensed. The generated
> geronimo-plugin.xml includes <license osi-approved="false">The
> Apache Software License, Version 2.0</license> rather than
> indicating true for osi-approved.
>
> So ... what to do with the vote? I really don't like the erroneous
> license message. I'm leaning toward cancelling the vote again to
> get this fixed. What are your opinions?
Personally, I'd like to see this fixed. How/where are we picking up
the osi-approved value?
--kevan
Re: [DISCUSS] Server Respository plugin for Geronimo 2.1+ - RC2
Posted by Jarek Gawor <jg...@gmail.com>.
On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 9:48 AM, Joe Bohn <jo...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> Joe Bohn wrote:
>>
>> Start of thread to discuss any concerns/issues/questions with the vote for
>> the Server Repository plugin for Geronimo 2.1+
>>
>> Joe
>>
>
> Jarek posted an concern in his vote on this plugin:
> Jarek Gawor wrote:
>> +1
>>
>> One minor comment: when installing the plugin using the admin console
>> it shows the license as:
>>
>> License: The Apache Software License, Version 2.0 (Proprietary)
>>
>> and should be :
>>
>> License: The Apache Software License, Version 2.0 (Open Source)
>
> As you can see, he still voted +1. However, this concerns me. I guess
> there must be something that I need to set for the plugin in the pom.xml to
> indicate that this is apache licensed. The generated geronimo-plugin.xml
> includes <license osi-approved="false">The Apache Software License, Version
> 2.0</license> rather than indicating true for osi-approved.
>
> So ... what to do with the vote? I really don't like the erroneous license
> message. I'm leaning toward cancelling the vote again to get this fixed.
> What are your opinions?
I voted +1 becuase the LICENSE file in the car file makes it clear
what the plugin license is. Also, the users will see this erroneous
license message if they install the plugin via the console and I think
most users will install it using the command line tools.
Jarek
Re: [DISCUSS] Server Respository plugin for Geronimo 2.1+ - RC2
Posted by Lin Sun <li...@gmail.com>.
I have to say that it is not very obvious - at least I didn't notice
it when I installed it from console the first time. Also, I think as
long as you have the right value osi-approved="true" in the
geronimo-plugins.xml at the official site, it should be ok. Looks
to me that the page is reading the site's geronimo-plugins.xml file
for the plugin's detail information instead of the sample's
geronimo-plugin.xml file.
Lin
On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 9:48 AM, Joe Bohn <jo...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> Joe Bohn wrote:
>>
>> Start of thread to discuss any concerns/issues/questions with the vote for
>> the Server Repository plugin for Geronimo 2.1+
>>
>> Joe
>>
>
> Jarek posted an concern in his vote on this plugin:
> Jarek Gawor wrote:
>> +1
>>
>> One minor comment: when installing the plugin using the admin console
>> it shows the license as:
>>
>> License: The Apache Software License, Version 2.0 (Proprietary)
>>
>> and should be :
>>
>> License: The Apache Software License, Version 2.0 (Open Source)
>
> As you can see, he still voted +1. However, this concerns me. I guess
> there must be something that I need to set for the plugin in the pom.xml to
> indicate that this is apache licensed. The generated geronimo-plugin.xml
> includes <license osi-approved="false">The Apache Software License, Version
> 2.0</license> rather than indicating true for osi-approved.
>
> So ... what to do with the vote? I really don't like the erroneous license
> message. I'm leaning toward cancelling the vote again to get this fixed.
> What are your opinions?
>
> Joe
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Server Respository plugin for Geronimo 2.1+ - RC2
Posted by Joe Bohn <jo...@earthlink.net>.
Joe Bohn wrote:
> Start of thread to discuss any concerns/issues/questions with the vote
> for the Server Repository plugin for Geronimo 2.1+
>
> Joe
>
Jarek posted an concern in his vote on this plugin:
Jarek Gawor wrote:
> +1
>
> One minor comment: when installing the plugin using the admin console
> it shows the license as:
>
> License: The Apache Software License, Version 2.0 (Proprietary)
>
> and should be :
>
> License: The Apache Software License, Version 2.0 (Open Source)
As you can see, he still voted +1. However, this concerns me. I guess
there must be something that I need to set for the plugin in the pom.xml
to indicate that this is apache licensed. The generated
geronimo-plugin.xml includes <license osi-approved="false">The Apache
Software License, Version 2.0</license> rather than indicating true for
osi-approved.
So ... what to do with the vote? I really don't like the erroneous
license message. I'm leaning toward cancelling the vote again to get
this fixed. What are your opinions?
Joe