geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Jencks <david_jen...@yahoo.com>
Subject Warning of change in configId format
Date Fri, 18 Nov 2005 07:30:15 GMT
I have been working on assembling geronimo using the packaging and 
assembly plugins.  This gives us the ability to put together versions 
of geronimo with different capabilities without duplication.  For 
instance, we now have a jetty-only and a tomcat-only version of 
geronimo.  To build these,

cd configs;maven -o multiproject:install; cd ..
cd assemblies/j2ee-jetty-server;maven -o;
cd ../j2ee-tomcat-server:maven -o

This relies on using the packaging plugin, which builds configurations 
and puts them into the local maven repository.  As such, it uses the 
maven id as the configId: they typically look like

${groupId}/cars/${artifactId}-${pom.currentVersion}.car

I think this is a big improvement over the unsystematic hand-invented 
ids we have been relying on up to now, but it is a backwards 
incompatible change that will require changing any plan that mentions a 
parentId  (many plans do not need to: the builders include default 
parents sufficient for the geronimo classes needed for the app to 
load).  It will also require changing the <module> element in gbean 
references that include them.

I think we should just go ahead with the change, and announce it 
loudly.  We could provide "adapter plans" with no content  of any kind 
that have e.g. a configId of org/apache/geronimo/rmi-naming and a 
parentId of geronimo/cars/geronimo-rmi-naming-1.0-SNAPSHOT.car.  This 
would allow plans that have only old-style parentIds to deploy 
successfully, but would not help with the gbean references.

I beileve in a slightly related development we are planning to change 
the groupId to org.apache.geronimo before v1.  Doing these changes more 
or less at once might reduce confusion.


Comments?  Objections?

thanks
david jencks


Mime
View raw message