geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Matt Hogstrom <>
Subject Re: Removing attributes and refs from the config.xml
Date Sun, 26 Feb 2006 09:28:26 GMT
I agree that the end goal here is the user experience.  When I was working with 
Jeff the other night the way to fix the logging problem at that point was to 
rebuild the server.  IMHO a user would at most be required to edit the 
config.xml and at least be able to click a radio button for a binary operation 
like enable/disable logging.  Anything beyond that and we will limit our user 
base as the server will be too expensive to work with.

The other thinkg to avoid is multiple configuration files.  As a user I want to 
find all config files in a single directory if possible (reduces my knowledge 
required to use the server) and then to have as few files as possible.  Again, 
this all front-ended with a console that can manipulate all (or at least as many 
options as possible).

I may not have captured this thought in my first post so apologies for repeating 


Bruce Snyder wrote:
> I'm gonna go out on a limb here and ask why we're trying to make all
> of this more difficult for users instead of easier? Requiring a user
> to: 1) gain knowledge of the plans used to create the CARs, and 2) to
> create a brand new XML file (config.xml) to define new functionality
> or override existing functionality seems ridiculous. The proposed
> solution seems to be treating the symptoms rather than the real
> disease.
> IMHO, CARs need to either be made more dynamic or need to be replaced
> with something more dynamic. The trouble I have with CARs is that
> changing them requires them to be fully rebuilt which requires the
> Geronimo source. Average users don't have the knowledge or time to
> deal with this so we offered the config.xml which we're finding
> doesn't really solve the whole problem either. If I had my druthers,
> I'd leave CARs the way they are and work to offer something more
> dynamic as a long-term solution.
> The idea I have is to use a standard XML dialect for configuration
> files - like XBean which currently requires Spring. I'm sure that this
> idea won't have many fans, but it's an easy way to reuse an existing
> solution to deliver an easier experience for Geronimo users which,
> IMO, should be our ultimate goal.
> Bruce
> --
> perl -e 'print unpack("u30","D0G)U8V4\@4VYY9&5R\"F)R=6-E+G-N>61E<D\!G;6%I;\"YC;VT*"
> );'
> Apache Geronimo (
> Castor (

View raw message