geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Jencks <david_jen...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: The Installer
Date Wed, 16 Nov 2005 17:06:27 GMT

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 information may be a little out of date.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
>>
>


Mime
View raw message