beehive-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Daryl Olander <dolan...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: reorganizing netui-blank [was: [Re: beehive-914 -- started yet?]]
Date Sun, 11 Sep 2005 14:22:41 GMT
+1 I think it best that we make this kind of changes now before we ship 1.0, 
this is a better model.

On 9/11/05, Eddie O'Neil <ekoneil@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> All--
> 
> I've got a patch ready which will reorganize the
> <dist-root>/samples/netui-blank web project from a source-in model
> like:
> 
> fooWeb/
> Controller.java
> index.jsp
> WEB-INF/
> web.xml
> src/
> build.xml
> build.properties
> Foo.java
> 
> to a source-peer model like:
> 
> fooWeb/
> build.xml
> build.properties
> src/
> Foo.java
> web/
> index.jsp
> Controller.java
> WEB-INF/
> web.xml
> 
> This brings the OOTB NetUI project model in-line with that prescribed
> by Tomcat and used in many projects. It's also what Adriano suggested
> and used for his NetBeans project.
> 
> We're getting in the last days before 1.0 here, so we need to do two 
> things:
> 
> 1) agree that this is the right thing to do
> 2) review the patch in this bug --
> http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEEHIVE-921
> 
> Please do both; if you disagree with (1), say so! :)
> 
> Once / if we agree on this, I'll commit it and take a couple of hours
> to rework some documentation. And, hopefully we can branch and ship
> 1.0. :)
> 
> Eddie
> 
> 
> 
> On 9/9/05, Rich Feit <richfeit@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Sounds great! Leaving netui-samples and netui-jsf seems like the right
> > thing to hold off for 1.1.
> >
> > Eddie O'Neil wrote:
> >
> > > Awesome. I'll make this change for netui-blank but will leave
> > >netui-jsf and netui-samples for the sake of stability. We can fix
> > >those for Beehive 1.1.
> > >
> > > This would switch the default NetUI project model to something that
> > >looks like this:
> > >
> > > http://jakarta.apache.org/tomcat/tomcat-5.0-doc/appdev/source.html
> > >
> > >which is basically:
> > >
> > > fooWebProject/
> > > web/
> > > src/
> > > build.xml
> > > build.properties
> > >
> > >with a build that works like samples/petstoreWeb.
> > >
> > > Any other thoughts about doing this?
> > >
> > >Eddie
> > >
> > >
> > >On 9/9/05, Rich Feit <richfeit@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >>I definitely agree on #2 (if I'm understanding you correctly) -- I 
> think
> > >>it should support the Tomcat model you're describing. Originally I'd
> > >>suggested supporting both because netui-blank is in the old project
> > >>model, so I assumed that this is the only one we would be supporting.
> > >>So I support making this change...
> > >>
> > >>Rich
> > >>
> > >>Eddie O'Neil wrote:
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>1) yes, this simply adds a convenience target to beehive-imports.xml.
> > >>>It doesn't attempt to fix the validation problem discussed earlier --
> > >>>depending on how it's fixed, that might be an SVN-side issue with
> > >>>building the distribution.
> > >>>
> > >>>2) I agree that we are moving away from the WEB-INF/src project model
> > >>>and onto the Tomcat model where web/ and src/ are peers. This target
> > >>>certainly could support both models, but it's just easier to have it
> > >>>support the one Tomcat prescribes that is widely used and is easily
> > >>>supported in various IDEs. We can document how to setup a project
> > >>>with source-in-webapp. If there was enough interest, we could make
> > >>>this change now...it only affects netui-samples, netui-blank, and
> > >>>netui-jsf.
> > >>>
> > >>> Thoughts?
> > >>>
> > >>>Eddie
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>Rich Feit wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>I see - so this isn't the complex part of the change we were talking
> > >>>>about. This is simply adding an ant target to beehive-imports.xml.

> It
> > >>>>seems like a good addition, but one question I have is whether we

> should
> > >>>>be supporting different project models with something like this.

> Seems
> > >>>>like we're moving away from a source-under-web-content model. What

> do
> > >>>>you think?
> > >>>>Rich
> > >>>>
> > >>>>Eddie O'Neil wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> Here's the Ant that will do this; it patches
> > >>>>>trunk/user/beehive-imports.xml and can be run as:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> $> ant -f beehive-imports.xml new.netui.webapp
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>which will prompt for a destination directory for the project.
Or, 
> it
> > >>>>>can be run like:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> $> ant -f beehive-imports.xml new.netui.webapp -Dwebapp.dir
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>which will skp the prompt since "webapp.dir" has already been

> provided.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> I think this will be *really* useful and less error-prone than
the
> > >>>>>alternative.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Thoughts?
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>Eddie
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>><snip>
> > >>>>> <target name="new.netui.webapp" description="Create
> > >>>>>a new NetUI-enabled Beehive webapp">
> > >>>>> <input message="Provide a fully-qualified web project path:"
> > >>>>> addproperty="webapp.dir"/>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> <copy todir="${webapp.dir}">
> > >>>>> <fileset dir="${basedir}/samples/netui-blank">
> > >>>>> <include name="**/*"/>
> > >>>>> </fileset>
> > >>>>> </copy>
> > >>>>> <deploy-netui webappDir="${webapp.dir}"/>
> > >>>>> <echo>Created a NetUI-enabled in ${webapp.dir}</echo>
> > >>>>> </target>
> > >>>>></snip>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>On 9/9/05, Eddie O'Neil <ekoneil@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> Gotcha. As far as the docs, I've got a placeholder in the
> > >>>>>>netui/projects.xml doc already that describes the cp / ant
-f 
> step.
> > >>>>>>So, that part is easy. ;)
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Patch forthcoming...
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>Eddie
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>On 9/9/05, Rich Feit <richfeit@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>Oh, I just meant we should take a week to have people
play with 
> it
> > >>>>>>>if we
> > >>>>>>>put it in for 1.0, that's all. I think we'd want to
get it into 
> the
> > >>>>>>>docs, too, especially where there are instructions for
copying
> > >>>>>>>netui-blank, etc. What do you think about that?
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>I'd definitely take a look at the diff, though, even
if it's
> > >>>>>>>something
> > >>>>>>>we hold until v1.1.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>Rich
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>Eddie O'Neil wrote:
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>Yeah -- I don't think it would take a week (probably
just a 
> couple
> > >>>>>>>>of hours), but it's a little different than how
we do things
> > >>>>>>>>right now
> > >>>>>>>>because we need to support two scenarios:
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>- create a new webapp
> > >>>>>>>>- inject the runtime files (JARs / resources) into
the samples
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>We've got the latter and could easily add the former.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>But, we'll get very little test mileage on it in
the near term. 
> I
> > >>>>>>>>can take a crack at it and see what you think of
the diff...
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>Eddie
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>On 9/9/05, Rich Feit <richfeit@gmail.com>
wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>Definitely, this would be a great thing to have.
I have a local
> > >>>>>>>>>script
> > >>>>>>>>>that does exactly this -- in retrospect, this
should have made
> > >>>>>>>>>me think
> > >>>>>>>>>of an ant target. I think it's something that
we should do for
> > >>>>>>>>>1.1,
> > >>>>>>>>>unless we want to delay the release for a week
or so...
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>Rich
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>Eddie O'Neil wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>It's complicated. :)
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>We really need a target that can "seed"
a Beehive webapp 
> including
> > >>>>>>>>>>all of the validation config files, runtime
JARs, and NetUI 
> URL
> > >>>>>>>>>>addressable resources. Today, this is done
using a command 
> like:
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>cp -rf samples/netui-blank <project-dir>
> > >>>>>>>>>>ant -f ant/beehive-runtime.xml deploy.beehive.webapp.runtime
> > >>>>>>>>>>-Dwebapp.dir=<project-dir>
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>If, for example, you just do the latter,
you'll end up with a
> > >>>>>>>>>>webapp
> > >>>>>>>>>>that has the runtime but no web.xml or validation
config
> > >>>>>>>>>>files. And,
> > >>>>>>>>>>that's kind of bad...
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>Would be *very* nice to have a target that
just does:
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>ant -f beehive-imports.xml new.beehive.webapp
-Dproject.dir=..
> .
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>It could even prompt for the project.dir
-- kind of like a new
> > >>>>>>>>>>project
> > >>>>>>>>>>wizard in Ant.
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>We could do this for 1.0, but it's not an
insignificant 
> change.
> > >>>>>>>>>>It's *definitely* something we need for
1.1...
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>Eddie
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>On 9/9/05, Rich Feit <richfeit@gmail.com>
wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>Yeah, if it's complicated at all, I
agree.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>Daryl Olander wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>+1 to doing the real fix post 1.0
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>On 9/9/05, Eddie O'Neil <ekoneil@gmail.com>
wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>I take it back...this isn't
a straightforward thing to fix
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>unfortunately because it affects
the Ant used to provide 
> the
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>runtime
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>in both the distribution and
SVN builds.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>It wouldn't be hard to change
it, but if we're going to do
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>that, we
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>should add the beehive-netui-validator-config.xml
file (and
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>consider
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>adding web.xml) to those as
well...
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>I agree (now) having them checked
in is the right thing
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>unless we
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>want to tackle the bigger problem
of copying all of the
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>config files.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>And, I'd rather ship 1.0 and
fix that later. :)
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>Eddie
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>On 9/9/05, Rich Feit <richfeit@gmail.com>
wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>OK, I certainly don't have
an objection to that... thanks.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>Rich
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>Eddie O'Neil wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Right, it doesn't *have*
to happen now, but doing it now
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>ensures
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>that we're consistent.
So, I'm going to go ahead and fix
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>while you're
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>getting the compiler
change in.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>:)
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Eddie
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Rich Feit wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>I haven't started
it -- it doesn't seem like anything
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>that has to go
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>into v1, right?
Just checking. I did update the
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>checked-in files
to
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>be
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>of the right version
-- this is just the longer-term fix
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>to ensure
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>that
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>this doesn't happen
again... :)
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Rich
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Eddie O'Neil wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Rich--
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Have you started
fixing BEEHIVE-914 yet? If not, let me
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>know and
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>I'll take that
one.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Eddie
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message