geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Erik Daughtrey <er...@schemacity.org>
Subject Re: The Installer
Date Wed, 16 Nov 2005 17:39:00 GMT
There's definitely a radio button capability. Do we want to enforce the 
configuration of only one web container?

Regards,

erik

 On Wednesday 16 November 2005 12:06, David Jencks wrote:
> On Nov 16, 2005, at 8:03 AM, Aaron Mulder wrote:
> > 1) I think the standalone compiler is the only necessary JAR, and I
> > had volunterred to try to get it onto iBiblio at one point, but didn't
> > actually get around to it.  It would be great if someone else could do
> > that.  Someone (Jacek?) pointed me to a writeup on how to get
> > arbitrary JARs onto ibiblio, and I can pass that along if it would be
> > helpful.
> >
> > 5) I think port validation was tricky, because IIRC, each field is
> > validated independently.  I don't think there's a good way to validate
> > a whole screen at a time, much less a group of ports on a group of
> > screens, some of which you may not have seen yet.  If this turns out
> > to be hard, I don't think it would be the end of the world to skip it
> > for now, since presumably the user knows not to create port conflicts.
>
> This was the demise of the M5 installer: it was very easy to get port
> conflicts.  I was thinking of some kind of verification class used at
> the end that made sure no property values matching some pattern had the
> same values.
>
> > 7) I think we could safely install all the schemas if you install J2EE
> > features, and none of the schemas otherwise.  It's not quite perfect,
> > but close enough.
>
> True, but I am hoping to move this into the assembly plugin and use a
> generic procedure to extract schemas rather than the somewhat custom
> code we use today.
>
> > The other problem we need to think about, related to the port issue,
> > is setting the default web port.  If you install only Jetty or Tomcat,
> > whichever one you install should default to 8080.  But if you install
> > both, they should default to different ports.  I would be OK saying
> > that the installer will not install both, which would make this
> > easier, but I don't think there's that kind of exclusivity in the
> > feature selection screen.
>
> I'd certainly like to know if there is some kind of "radio button"
> functionality.
>
> > Then again, I haven't worked with IzPack for a while now so my
> > information may be a little out of date.  :)
> >
> > Aaron
> >
> > On 11/16/05, Erik Daughtrey <erikd@schemacity.org> wrote:
> >> Hey David,  I'll start working on these items.
>
> Excellent
>
>
> david jencks
>
> >> erik
> >>
> >>  On Wednesday 16 November 2005 03:24, David Jencks wrote:
> >>> It would be good if we could get the installer working well for 1.0.
> >>> Here are some of the things I think need to happen.
> >>>
> >>> 1. The necessary izpack jars need to get into some maven repo,
> >>> preferably a public one such as ibiblio.  They might be on there way
> >>> there already, otherwise we should figure out which jars are needed
> >>> and
> >>> file an upload request.
> >>>
> >>> 2. Installer building should occur in its own module in assemblies.
> >>> It
> >>> would be best if the installer can be built using a maven plugin, but
> >>> if that seems impractical we can use a bunch of jelly for now.  There
> >>> is an izpack plugin but I think it is maven 2 only (??).
> >>>
> >>> 3. The installer currently has a page where you check the major
> >>> features you want, and on the following pages you configure them.
> >>> This
> >>> seems like a basically acceptable paradigm to me, but there is a
> >>> problem in that all the "following pages" display even if they are
> >>> empty.  I've been told that moving the <createForPack> element out
> >>> one
> >>> level to the panel element will fix this.
> >>>
> >>> 4. The installer currently works by installing everything in a full
> >>> geronimo install, and not starting the pieces you don't want.  This
> >>> is
> >>> rather unsatisfactory unless you sell disk space.  The geronimo
> >>> assembly is moving to use of the packaging and assembly plugins, and
> >>> we
> >>> can leverage that with the installer.  What I am thinking of is
> >>> including a maven repository inside  the installer jar that includes
> >>> everything from a full geronimo install with everything, including
> >>> all
> >>> the .car files for the configurations.  Then  we can imitate or use
> >>> the
> >>> assembly plugin to copy the configuration dependencies into the
> >>> install
> >>> target and install the actual configurations.
> >>>
> >>> 5.  We should find a way to check that no port conflicts have been
> >>> configured.
> >>>
> >>> 6. We need to construct a config.xml file for the target install.
> >>> This
> >>> could be done by adding bits associated with each configuration, or
> >>> by
> >>> removing chunks from a "universal" config.xml for the configurations
> >>> we
> >>> didnt' install.
> >>>
> >>> 7.  Somewhat similarly, we need to include the schema files (for
> >>> human
> >>> reference, they aren't used by geronimo) for the bits that are
> >>> included
> >>> in the install target.  This should proceed by fixing the xmlbeans
> >>> plugin to put schemas in the same place the xmlbeans ant task does,
> >>> and
> >>> by extracting all such schemas from our dependencies.  This needs to
> >>> be
> >>> added to the assembly plugin: it is not installer specific.
> >>>
> >>> There's probably more to do, but this is what I've thought of so far.
> >>>
> >>> thanks
> >>> david jencks
> >>
> >> --
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >> Erik

-- 

Regards,

Erik

Mime
View raw message