geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From anita kulshreshtha <a_kuls...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: SUMMARY OF: Change "configuration" to "module"
Date Sun, 23 Apr 2006 21:53:28 GMT
Comments inline..

--- Aaron Mulder <ammulder@alumni.princeton.edu> wrote:

> So everyone seems to be in favor.
> 
> I'm 100% in favor of making this change in our documentation and
> presentations and so on.
> 
> I'm 95% in favor of changing "configId" to "moduleId" in our plans --
> just need to find the time to do it and it'll be an extensive change
> to the current plans in Geronimo and the TCK.  Even if we silently
> upgrade plans using "configId" during deployment I think we want the
> plans distributed with the server to use the recommended syntax
> wherever possible.  Any volunteers?
   Count me in. I can do Geronimo. If you have a list of what all is
affected (other than configs/**/plan.xml), I can start from there.
> 
> I'm not necessarily in favor of changing CAR to MAR.  That's used so
> infrequently (and saying "just apply this MAR to your server" sounds
> so dubious)

   I did not like the sound of 'MAR' either, just mentioned it to start
the conversation ;-)

Thanks
Anita

 that I think we can just say "it's a just a CAR; it
> doesn't stand for anything".  Or call them plugins instead.  :)
> 
> And while it might be nice to change the names of some of the server
> guts dealing with configurations (ConfigurationInfo,
> ConfigurationData, etc.) I don't feel the urge to do that myself --
> if
> someone else wants to take a swing at it, be my guest.
> 
> Thanks,
>     Aaron
> 
> On 4/23/06, Matt Hogstrom <matt@hogstrom.org> wrote:
> > +1
> >
> > Aaron Mulder wrote:
> > > All,
> > >
> > > How would you feel about referring to configurations (e.g. a
> group of
> > > GBeans with own ID and classloader) as a "module" instead?  It
> seems
> > > like "configuration" can be confusing, as it more traditionally
> refers
> > > to a larger scope like an entire installation.  For example, if
> you
> > > say you have two different WebLogic configurations or two
> different
> > > Apache (HTTP) configurations, you're saying either you have two
> > > installations, or you have two totally separate product
> configurations
> > > available for the same product installation.  You're not saying
> you
> > > have an app and a database pool within one runtime, but that's
> what
> > > "two different configurations" presently would mean in relation
> to
> > > Geronimo.
> > >
> > > It seems like it would be clearer to say that a Geronimo
> installation
> > > loads many modules, and each module includes many components
> (GBeans).
> > >
> > > I'm not proposing that we go changing class names and stuff, but
> I'm
> > > proposing that we make a concerted effort in our documentation
> and
> > > presentations to present the name of the "unit with an ID and
> > > classloader holding many components" as a "module".
> > >
> > > What do you think?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >     Aaron
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

Mime
View raw message