From dev-return-11506-apmail-geronimo-dev-archive=geronimo.apache.org@geronimo.apache.org Sat Feb 12 03:37:48 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-geronimo-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 37333 invoked from network); 12 Feb 2005 03:37:47 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 12 Feb 2005 03:37:47 -0000 Received: (qmail 44079 invoked by uid 500); 12 Feb 2005 03:37:35 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-geronimo-dev-archive@geronimo.apache.org Received: (qmail 44030 invoked by uid 500); 12 Feb 2005 03:37:35 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@geronimo.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Reply-To: dev@geronimo.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@geronimo.apache.org Received: (qmail 44017 invoked by uid 99); 12 Feb 2005 03:37:35 -0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (hermes.apache.org: local policy) Received: from saturn.opentools.org (HELO saturn.opentools.org) (66.250.40.202) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.28) with ESMTP; Fri, 11 Feb 2005 19:37:34 -0800 Received: by saturn.opentools.org (Postfix, from userid 500) id 41B3D3F37; Fri, 11 Feb 2005 23:09:28 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by saturn.opentools.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E5ADF28A for ; Fri, 11 Feb 2005 23:09:28 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2005 23:09:28 -0500 (EST) From: Aaron Mulder X-X-Sender: ammulder@saturn.opentools.org To: dev@geronimo.apache.org Subject: Re: A couple of modest proposals In-Reply-To: <420D5B5B.1040404@apache.org> Message-ID: References: <420D240D.2060008@toolazydogs.com> <420D5B5B.1040404@apache.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Virus-Checked: Checked X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N I think one of the problems is that dependencies go both ways. Changes to Jetty may require (or be required by) changes to the Jetty configuration and deployment code in Geronimo. But OpenEJB deployment code is in OpenEJB and depends heavily on Geronimo, not to mention the OpenEJB assembly process. I think we'd have to sort out what type of code should go where in order to make easy and consistent non-uberbuilds possible. And the more I think about it, the more I think we'd want to push as much as possible out to the projects. Provide stable GBean features and interfaces in Geronimo, and put the Geronimo Jetty deployer in Jetty, so the Geronimo libs can be relatively stable and all the changes to get Jetty working would be made on the Jetty side (and only on the Jetty side). Still, if we did that and depended on only pre-packaged Jetty builds, it would be quite hard to get a Geronimo build of the latest and greatest. So I guess to my mind, easy builds are opposed to cutting-edge Geronimo assemblies. Personally, I wouldn't mind easier and more stable builds, but I suspect everyone who's actively TCK testing would freak. Aaron On Fri, 11 Feb 2005, Jeremy Boynes wrote: > I would like to see what you check out of SVN at Apache build on its > own, every time, without needing to check out HEAD from several other > projects; we should be able to use published releases or, if necessary > (and temporarily), SNAPSHOTS. > > The uber-build should be considered convenience for Geronimo developers > for use when, and only when, they are doing stuff that requires changes > in multiple projects. If we have clear APIs this should be relatively > infrequent. > > Needing to build multiple projects concurrently from HEAD is a serious > PITA for most users of the project and we need to stop pissing them off. > > Having said that I don't want us to disappear into another month long > period of disruption as we refactor the build yet again. We should plan > out how we, the whole community, would like it to work and get it right. > > -- > Jeremy >