geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joe Bohn <joe.b...@earthlink.net>
Subject Re: littleG (minimal-tomcat-server) status
Date Thu, 09 Mar 2006 17:43:50 GMT
1613_RemoveDeps4.patch

Jeff Genender wrote:
> 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
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
> 
> 

-- 
Joe Bohn
joe.bohn at earthlink.net

"He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep, to gain what he cannot 
lose."   -- Jim Elliot

Mime
View raw message