geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeff Genender <jgenen...@apache.org>
Subject Re: littleG (minimal-tomcat-server) status
Date Thu, 09 Mar 2006 16:27:01 GMT
Hey Joe,

Which patch is the most up-to-date one to use?

Jeff

Joe Bohn wrote:
> Thank you Jeff.
> 
> Please note that as you look at GERONIMO-1613, (
> http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1613 )
> the only patch you should need to apply is the latest one ....
> 1613_RemoveDeps4.patch.   This is all inclusive of the other patches
> with the exception of the first patch that Dave Jencks already
> integrated a few weeks back.
> 
> BTW, there are also two JIRAs for some problems that I noticed were
> introduced as a result of the first patch (sigh)   .... GERONIMO-1634 (
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1634 ) and GERONIMO-1699
> ( https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1699 ).
> 
> Joe
> 
> 
> Jeff Genender wrote:
>> Hi Joe,
>>
>> Thanks for working on this...I'll take a look.
>>
>> Jeff
>>
>> Joe Bohn wrote:
>>
>>> I'd really like to get a committer to look into these changes and
>>> hopefully commit them fairly quickly.
>>>
>>> David J ... I know that you're tied up with the configID changes.  Is
>>> there somebody else that could take a quick look at these changes?
>>>
>>> I'm concerned that the current activity to convert from M1 to M2 might
>>> result in some of these changes being lost in the conversion.  For
>>> example, the patch includes a change to the tomcat module which I see is
>>> being actively converted to M2.
>>>
>>> I should note that these changes are a bit risky and will possibly cause
>>> some NoClassDefFoundErrors on specific scenarios when integrated.  I
>>> have done the following tests for both the jetty and tomcat assemblies
>>> but I obviously can't cover everything.  1) Verified the itests are
>>> successful.  2) Verified that deployment of a web app works  3) Verified
>>> that the main console portlets still function (all main GUIs presented
>>> without error and some detailed functions verified)  4) Verified that
>>> all of the daytrader application web primitives continued to work.    At
>>> this point it might be best to integrate the changes and deal with the
>>> fall-out.  Thoughts?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Joe
>>>
>>> Joe Bohn wrote:
>>>
>>>> Ah ... thanks for the clarification Kevan.   In that case I don't
>>>> think it is needed in rmi-naming with the uber-spec removed.   I
>>>> couldn't find any reason to include the corba spec in the rmi-naming
>>>> config.   I've created a new patch with this change and added it to
>>>> GERONIMO-1613.
>>>>
>>>> So, with the corba spec removed our image size is back down to about
>>>> 15.7 meg.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Joe
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Kevan Miller wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 3/3/06, *Joe Bohn* <joe.bohn@earthlink.net
>>>>> <mailto:joe.bohn@earthlink.net>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>    I just added an updated patch to Geronimo-1613
>>>>>    https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1613
>>>>>
>>>>>    After some painstaking effort, I was finally able to remove the
>>>>>    uber-spec dependency from rmi-naming which should have resulted
>>>>> in an
>>>>>    additional savings in little-G of nearly 1.2 meg. 
>>>>> Unfortunately, I had
>>>>>    to add in some individual spec jars that were not previously
>>>>> included
>>>>>    and which decreased the savings somewhat.
>>>>>
>>>>>    The real disappointment was when I picked up the latest image
>>>>> yesterday
>>>>>    to create the patch and noticed Kevan's change to include the
>>>>> CORBA spec
>>>>>    in rmi-naming to work around some other problem.  This adds back in
>>>>>    about 640K.  The comment indicates that this is only temporary. 
>>>>> How
>>>>>    long will it be needed there and is somebody working to remove it?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Joe,
>>>>> If you've removed the uber-jar, then you should be able to remove the
>>>>> CORBA spec jar (assuming you're including the CORBA spec jar at an
>>>>> appropriate location...). The uber-jar currently contains bad corba
>>>>> spec classes. The dependency in rmi-naming put the CORBA spec jar in
>>>>> the classpath in front of the uber-jar. I also plan on fixing the
>>>>> uber-jar (getting the proper spec classes in the uber-jar).
>>>>>
>>>>> --kevan
>>>>>
>>>>>    So, after all that the latest patch only takes us from 16.4 to
>>>>> about
>>>>>    16.3 meg ... but we'll drop more when CORBA comes out of
>>>>> rmi-naming.
>>>>>
>>>>>    Would it be possible to get this patch committed to trunk before
>>>>> too
>>>>>    much more work happens on the maven2 effort?  I think that it would
>>>>>    benefit the migration and integration if these updated project.xmls
>>>>>    were
>>>>>    used as the starting point.
>>>>>
>>>>>    Joe
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>    --
>>>>>    Joe Bohn
>>>>>    joe.bohn at earthlink.net <http://earthlink.net>
>>>>>
>>>>>    "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep, to gain what he
>>>>> cannot
>>>>>    lose."   -- Jim Elliot
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
> 

Mime
View raw message