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 2008/10/16 22:34:08 UTC
source-repository (in plugin metadata) and default-repository (in plugin catalog)
Hi,
We provide source-repository in plugin metadata and default-repository
in plugin catalog.
Currently, (I think this is how it works) when we install a plugin
from a remote repo A, if the installation is not restricted to the
particular repo A:
If the plugin specifies 1+ source-repository, we'll use that and
ignore the default-repository specified in plugin catalog.
If the plugin doesn't specify any source-repository, we'll use the
default-repository specified in the plugin catalog.
I 'd like to change it to:
If the plugin specifies 1+ source-repository, we'll use that AND the
default-repository specified in plugin catalog.
I think that would give us more flexibility. Thoughts?
P.S. this is related to this thread on user list where a user wants to
install active mq on top of little G env -
http://www.nabble.com/how-to-add-activemq-to-little-g--to19837127s134.html
Lin
Re: source-repository (in plugin metadata) and default-repository
(in plugin catalog)
Posted by Donald Woods <dw...@apache.org>.
Yep, seems like a fix that would be useful for 2.1 users.
-Donald
Lin Sun wrote:
> Hi Donald, thanks for the feedback. I've made the change as described
> in JIRA G 4370. Please let me know if we should pull this into 2.1
> branch (I think it will require some manual patch as
> pluginInstallerGBean has changed a lot in trunk so I only checked the
> code into trunk for now).
>
> Lin
>
> On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 4:56 PM, Donald Woods <dw...@apache.org> wrote:
>> Sounds good. That was the way I thought it was/should work.
>>
>>
>> -Donald
>>
>>
>> Lin Sun wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> We provide source-repository in plugin metadata and default-repository
>>> in plugin catalog.
>>>
>>> Currently, (I think this is how it works) when we install a plugin
>>> from a remote repo A, if the installation is not restricted to the
>>> particular repo A:
>>>
>>> If the plugin specifies 1+ source-repository, we'll use that and
>>> ignore the default-repository specified in plugin catalog.
>>>
>>> If the plugin doesn't specify any source-repository, we'll use the
>>> default-repository specified in the plugin catalog.
>>>
>>> I 'd like to change it to:
>>>
>>> If the plugin specifies 1+ source-repository, we'll use that AND the
>>> default-repository specified in plugin catalog.
>>>
>>> I think that would give us more flexibility. Thoughts?
>>>
>>> P.S. this is related to this thread on user list where a user wants to
>>> install active mq on top of little G env -
>>> http://www.nabble.com/how-to-add-activemq-to-little-g--to19837127s134.html
>>>
>>> Lin
>>>
>
Re: source-repository (in plugin metadata) and default-repository (in plugin catalog)
Posted by Lin Sun <li...@gmail.com>.
Hi Donald, thanks for the feedback. I've made the change as described
in JIRA G 4370. Please let me know if we should pull this into 2.1
branch (I think it will require some manual patch as
pluginInstallerGBean has changed a lot in trunk so I only checked the
code into trunk for now).
Lin
On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 4:56 PM, Donald Woods <dw...@apache.org> wrote:
> Sounds good. That was the way I thought it was/should work.
>
>
> -Donald
>
>
> Lin Sun wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> We provide source-repository in plugin metadata and default-repository
>> in plugin catalog.
>>
>> Currently, (I think this is how it works) when we install a plugin
>> from a remote repo A, if the installation is not restricted to the
>> particular repo A:
>>
>> If the plugin specifies 1+ source-repository, we'll use that and
>> ignore the default-repository specified in plugin catalog.
>>
>> If the plugin doesn't specify any source-repository, we'll use the
>> default-repository specified in the plugin catalog.
>>
>> I 'd like to change it to:
>>
>> If the plugin specifies 1+ source-repository, we'll use that AND the
>> default-repository specified in plugin catalog.
>>
>> I think that would give us more flexibility. Thoughts?
>>
>> P.S. this is related to this thread on user list where a user wants to
>> install active mq on top of little G env -
>> http://www.nabble.com/how-to-add-activemq-to-little-g--to19837127s134.html
>>
>> Lin
>>
>
Re: source-repository (in plugin metadata) and default-repository
(in plugin catalog)
Posted by Donald Woods <dw...@apache.org>.
Sounds good. That was the way I thought it was/should work.
-Donald
Lin Sun wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We provide source-repository in plugin metadata and default-repository
> in plugin catalog.
>
> Currently, (I think this is how it works) when we install a plugin
> from a remote repo A, if the installation is not restricted to the
> particular repo A:
>
> If the plugin specifies 1+ source-repository, we'll use that and
> ignore the default-repository specified in plugin catalog.
>
> If the plugin doesn't specify any source-repository, we'll use the
> default-repository specified in the plugin catalog.
>
> I 'd like to change it to:
>
> If the plugin specifies 1+ source-repository, we'll use that AND the
> default-repository specified in plugin catalog.
>
> I think that would give us more flexibility. Thoughts?
>
> P.S. this is related to this thread on user list where a user wants to
> install active mq on top of little G env -
> http://www.nabble.com/how-to-add-activemq-to-little-g--to19837127s134.html
>
> Lin
>