beehive-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Eddie O'Neil <ekon...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: reorganizing netui-blank [was: [Re: beehive-914 -- started yet?]]
Date Sun, 11 Sep 2005 20:15:29 GMT
Adriano--

  Yeah, the Maven work Adam has done is a great step forward; I don't
think we'll get it in for 1.0 (sorry, Adam!).  But, shortly after 1.0
goes out, we'll figure out a way to distribute Maven support and will
be looking for help to get it integrated into the next Beehive release
(1.1, presumably).

  It is a pity that Pollinate has kind of stagnated right
now.....we'll see how the Beehive tooling story evolves.

  Yes, I __certainly__ hope that Beehive 1.0 can be out this week...I
think we're all anxious to get an official, final release out.  :)

Eddie



On 9/11/05, Glauber Adriano Reis <glauber.reis@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm happy now, the layout makes its way smothly into NetBeans when you import it as an
> external web project.
> I've got 3 questions:
> 1 - would maven-ized samples be bundled with V1? If so, I read in the mailing list
> about the plugin(I was working on such a thing as well but stoped since it had
> been already developed) but I cannot find the plugin or anything mentioning it in JIRA.
> 
> 2 - Such a pity that Pollinate project is dead. What you guys think? ...the latest
> NeBeans version to be released (v5) will have struts support. I think it would be cool
> having some sort of minimal beehive support as well, I'd be very glad working on it (since
I probably
> wont use WebLogic 9 eclipse plugins) but want you opinion.
> 
> 3 - Is Beehive V1 due out this week? I'm pretty much anxious...  :)
> 
> 
> Glauber Adriano
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Eddie O'Neil 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
View raw message