geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Aaron Mulder <ammul...@alumni.princeton.edu>
Subject Re: XML plan files not included in distributions
Date Wed, 01 Feb 2006 16:07:28 GMT
Sure, I'm fine with a disclaimer.  :)  I think the JSR-77 method to
get the plan may be a little generic, but then we can have a "dump
config" tool that will spit out XML to the command line or to a file
or whatever and that one would give you a little warning when you
invoke it.  It might also be possible to flag when the configurations
were modified so we could tell if the plan was accurate (modified =
deployed then accurate, modified > deployed then not accurate).

Thanks,
     Aaron

On 2/1/06, Jeff Genender <jgenender@apache.org> wrote:
> I know its not easy, but its something I think is important to have at
> some point.  It would be nice to know the current state of Geronimo and
> have it spit out the configuration or be able to view it.  There are
> many areas where this would be very useful.  So maybe one day? ;-)
>
> My .02, I would be careful to include the current plans in the
> config.store or through the console without some sort of disclaimer that
> says they are the original plans and are not the current state.  What do
> you think?
>
> Jeff
>
> Aaron Mulder wrote:
> > Well, I wasn't going to go that far.  Generally speaking, we can't
> > easily reconstruct a plan from a set of GBeans (particularly for plans
> > that use abbreviated XML syntax like for CSS/TSS or login modules).
> > I'd prefer to start with "retrieve original deployment plan" and get
> > that in there, and then if we want to we can think about stuff like
> > you're describing.  (After all, any plan we provided in docs/ wouldn't
> > match the current state of the configuration either...)
> >
> > Thanks,
> >     Aaron
> >
> > On 2/1/06, Jeff Genender <jgenender@apache.org> wrote:
> >> Aaron, yes...that is a great idea.
> >>
> >> But then I think we get into opening up the can of worms about the plan
> >> files in the config.store matching what is actually running in Geronimo.
> >>  It would be great to have something that can "rebuild" a plan from the
> >> running configuration, so you can see an accurate snapshot.  I would
> >> love to jump on this, but my plate is really full right now...
> >>
> >> Any takers?  Otherwise I may be able to get to it in a couple of weeks.
> >>
> >> In the mean time, would anyone mind if we did bundle the plan files
> >> somewhere in G for reference?
> >>
> >> Jeff
> >>
> >> Aaron Mulder wrote:
> >>> Though personally, I think I'd rather store them in the config store
> >>> and have an easy routine to get them out of there (using a JSR-77 call
> >>> like the one that gets the J2EE deployment descriptor)...  Some day, I
> >>> guess.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>>     Aaron
> >>>
> >>> On 2/1/06, Jeff Genender <jgenender@apache.org> wrote:
> >>>> Yes, I would really like to see the original plans in the doc for
> >>>> reference.  I think it will be helpful and good reference for those
> >>>> people who need to override Gbeans in the config.xml.
> >>>>
> >>>> Jeff
> >>>>
> >>>> Bruce Snyder wrote:
> >>>>> On 1/31/06, John Sisson <jrsisson@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>> Is there a reason why we no longer ship the XML plan files in
the
> >>>>>> distributions? In the M5 release (when we were using modules/assembly)
> >>>>>> we included them in the geronimo\doc\plan directory.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I haven't been able to find a JIRA for this, but seem to remember
> >>>>>> someone discussing it recently.
> >>>>> I just discovered this the other day and as far as I can tell, it
was
> >>>>> just not considered before shipping 1.0. Call it an oversight. But
> >>>>> there's no time like the present for fixing it.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 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 (http://geronimo.apache.org/)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Castor (http://castor.org/)
>

Mime
View raw message