geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kevan Miller <>
Subject Re: What do we do about fixable problems in M5?
Date Wed, 05 Oct 2005 14:18:58 GMT
Without a really big disclaimer on the download page, my guess is that
approximately 100% of new-to-Geronimo M5 Installer users will run into this
problem. All you have to do is keep hitting "Next". I did. I just never
started my "installed" server, because I'd already tested the zipped/tarred
version of code (my mistake).

I don't think an errata is sufficient and I don't see how we can ignore such
a visible issue. This may be a bit heretical, but one option is not to
release the installer. Although this is a server issue, you don't hit this
problem in normal usage when running from an zip/tar "install" (at least I
haven't run into any other problems, am I missing something?).

Most first-time users will choose the install download thinking they're
making their lives easier, when actually, they've just made their lives more
difficult. Although some last-minute hard work went into the installer, IMO,
the M5 installer is of limited value for first-time Geronimo users. I also
think that the current installer is actually a configuration utility in
disguise -- we should start separating concerns...

BTW, I assume that actually fixing the underlying problem means rerunning
the TCK tests? Thus the reticence for fixing?


On 10/5/05, Geir Magnusson Jr. <> wrote:
> On Oct 5, 2005, at 8:30 AM, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
> > I think that will work but users won't find Geronimo incredibly
> > useful if they have to pull a whole new build to fix a single problem.
> Which will work?
> i think the errata is necessary so people will know what to do. As
> for a quick M6? I think it depends on the %-age of people that will
> hit the problem.
> > I discovered a similar problem in TranQL that the 1.1 SNAPSHOT
> > doesn't generate the right SQL syntax for DB2 and had to tweak the
> > Syntax Generator. So the option going forward is for someone to
> > pull TranQL 1.2-SNAPSHOT which wil most likely break their build
> > too because of the serialization problem (probably not likely with
> > my example but a high probability for other types of fixes).
> Does this mean as of now, we have a problem w/ DB2?
> >
> > Sachin had the right idea of highlighting the issues with
> > serialVersionUIDs but that was part of a larger problem. I'll open
> > a feature JIRA that focuses on improved serviceability which would
> > encompass these recurring issues and we'll look for someone to step
> > up to the plate and put a strategy together.
> >
> yes, I think that's a different (but very important) issue altogether.
> > Thoughts?
> >
> Go man, go...
> > - Matt
> >
> > Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> >
> >> On Oct 4, 2005, at 11:24 PM, David Jencks wrote:
> >>
> >>> Stefan Schmidt has found our first configuration problem in M5,
> >>> namely that the listener name in the ejb builder in
> >>> config.tomcat.xml points half to tomcat and half to jetty. This
> >>> is easy to fix by hand (change JettyWebContainer to
> >>> TomcatWebContainer). However I doubt we want to rerelease M5 to
> >>> fix this. What do we want to do about issues like this? One
> >>> possibility is to have an "errata" page clearly linked from the
> >>> download page.
> >>>
> >> That's a great idea.
> >>
> >>> There must be some other possibilities, any ideas?
> >>>
> >> 1) Can we capture this as some kind of functional test to prevent
> >> from happening again?
> >> 2) how long would it take to fix on branch/m5 (and head) and do a
> >> M6 tag off of branch/m5 (if people don't find that too
> >> nauseating) and release that?
> >> geir
> >>
> >
> >
> --
> Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437

View raw message