geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Geir Magnusson Jr." <>
Subject Re: [vote] PMC to accept DayTrader contribution and/or/not create "application" subproject
Date Wed, 21 Sep 2005 04:33:49 GMT

On Sep 21, 2005, at 12:13 AM, David Jencks wrote:

> My concern is primarily with  the geronimo plan.  While presumably  
> the app itself isn't going to need to change to be deployed to  
> other app servers, I expect each server to need a separate plan.

Wouldn't that be part of the DayTrader project to maintain, since  
they know what they need to deploy, and that may change over time?

> I was thinking we'd keep the app and geronimo plan together in  
> synch with the geronimo version.  Obviously this is not ideal, but  
> I haven't thought of a better solution.  Maybe have the app  
> separate and a module in geronimo/apps to build a configuration for  
> the current geronimo version?

Or just force the people working on DayTrader to follow, or stablize  
our plan :)

I see what you're saying.

(My biggest concern with asking the question was to see if it was  
because people had different ideas about how "heavy" a subproject was.)


> thanks
> david jencks
> On Sep 20, 2005, at 11:59 PM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>> I'm just curious what people expect to happen here.    I'm happy  
>> to go with the flow, but at least want to understand the flow.
>> DayTrader is an application that is used as a performance tool for  
>> any J2EE server, so it's not Geronimo only. (Contrast that with  
>> the console, as an example.)  It makes little sense to me to tie  
>> it to Geronimo releases no matter what the stability of Geronimo.   
>> We can use it to measure Geronimo against other servers, and  
>> should use it daily to ensure that we don't regress performance- 
>> wise.  To do that, I think we'd want to have a released version of  
>> it, so we could at compare apples to apples.  The tools can't vary  
>> freely and randomly with the code we're trying to test....   Matt  
>> would have a better perspective, I guess.
>> Instead of a new subproject, which people seem to find a bad idea  
>> for reasons I don't grok - as it's just out of SVN trunk, has  
>> separate release cycles from G server, and has some mention on the  
>> website - how about at least putting it into devtools?  Can we  
>> avoid adding to the clutter of trunk, something we seemed to  
>> support earlier today?
>> geir
>> On Sep 20, 2005, at 8:48 PM, David Blevins wrote:
>>> +1  Accept the DayTrader donation into the project
>>> -1  Do not create Applications subproject.  Leave in trunk.
>>> On Sep 20, 2005, at 4:28 PM, John Sisson wrote:
>>> > (Keep it simple for now.  Review this later when Geronimo is  
>>> more stable.  I think
>>> > it is too early to try to have applications with their own  
>>> release cycle)
>>> Well put.
>>> -David
>> -- 
>> Geir Magnusson Jr                                  +1-203-665-6437

Geir Magnusson Jr                                  +1-203-665-6437

View raw message