geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Jencks <>
Subject Re: Geronimo Community
Date Mon, 23 Jan 2006 02:49:05 GMT

On Jan 22, 2006, at 6:09 PM, Aaron Mulder wrote:

> OK.  I've been quiet about mine because if I describe it then Alan
> will say it's a new feature, whereas if I just check it in with a
> couple JIRA references then it'll probably slide as a bug fix.  :)
> Anyway, I'm working on a new JMS portlet.  It's going to work
> similarly to the DB pool and security realm portlet, except I've
> finally decided to break it up onto smaller action handlers instead of
> just having one gigantic portlet.  The JMS one is a little more
> complex because you can have both connection factories and
> destinations in the same configuration, and you can have more than one
> of each, and also you may reasonably want to use a RAR other than our
> default.  But I think the feel will be similar when finished.
> On the bug fix side, I had to disable big chunks of the current JMS
> destination portlet for 1.0, and the connection factory one isn't very
> satisfactory but probably isn't terribly broken other than hardcoding
> the plan format and RAR reference and object names and so on.  OK,
> that's pretty broken.  But really, the destination one was worse.
> On the feature side, it's more code than you'd see in a traditional
> bug fix, but hey, it's only the console.  :)

That sounds great!  I won't enter into the discussion about which  
version it should appear in :-)
> Anyway, since you wrote this note without actually describing what
> you're up to, what are you up to?

I think I've actually already said, this time :-).  I've been working  
with Bruce on limited-function geronimos and thinking about making  
the security system pluggable.  I've also been working a lot on  
jetspeed 2 integration, although the effect on geronimo so far has  
been limited to lots of security bug fixes.

Speaking of which, ... I seem to recall a long time ago you  
mentioning the idea of supplying a portlet app for each component and  
plugging it into the admin console.  I think J2 in geronimo will now  
support deploying portlet apps more or less dynamically, although I'm  
not yet happy with exactly how this is happening.  However, I'm not  
sure how to extend the portal itself based on adding a portlet app,  
nor do I have any idea what else in the portal needs changing when a  
component "registers".  Are we at a point where talking about this  
makes sense?

david jencks

> Thanks,
>     Aaron
> On 1/22/06, David Jencks <> wrote:
>> in my understanding of "the apache way", one of the important
>> principles is that all decisions happen on the mailing list.  To me,
>> for Geronimo, that means that if you are working on a feature more
>> complex than a simple bug fix, you describe it in general terms in an
>> email to the dev list or in a jira entry.  While I try to follow this
>> I know I often fail and would appreciate reminders when I do.
>> When I don't see this happening, for Geronimo code or for code in
>> projects that are supposed to be on the way into incubation as
>> Geronimo sub projects, I get worried and wonder how long the project
>> will survive.
>> Comments?
>> thanks
>> david jencks

View raw message