geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Prasad Kashyap" <goyathlay.geron...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Questions about the packaging plugin
Date Wed, 05 Apr 2006 19:49:09 GMT
The assembly plugin is waiting for the merge too. When is it planned for ?

Cheers
Prasad

On 4/5/06, Dain Sundstrom <dain@iq80.com> wrote:
> Branch 1.1 uses the m2 repository layout for the main geronimo
> repository, so you could grab the code from there.  I personally
> would perfer if we could let this problem sit until we merge branch
> 1.1 into HEAD, since we made major changes to this code in branch 1.1.
>
> -dain
>
> On Apr 5, 2006, at 8:47 AM, anita kulshreshtha wrote:
>
> > David J,
> >      o.a.g.system.repository.ReadOnlyRepository has a method
> >  'public boolean hasURI(URI uri)', which is maven version dependent.
> > Should I try to change it so that it works on both versions, i.e. m1
> > and m2? How is the implementation defined in the packaging plugin
> > 'public class MavenRepository implements Repository' being used?
> >
> > Thanks
> > Anita
> >
> > --- anita kulshreshtha <a_kulshre@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >> David,
> >>    I am encountering a strange problem probably
> >> because I am doing something wrong. When I add
> >> commons-logging to the urls used for constructing the
> >> classloader for PackageBuilder. I get error :
> >>
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > ------
> >> [ERROR] FATAL ERROR
> >> [INFO]
> >>
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > ------
> >> [INFO] null
> >> Invalid class loader hierarchy.  You have more than
> >> one version of 'org.apache.commons.logging.Log'
> >> visible, which is not allowed.
> >>
> >>     If I do not add it I get this error :
> >>
> >> [INFO]
> >>
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > ------
> >> [ERROR] FATAL ERROR
> >> [INFO]
> >>
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > ------
> >> [INFO] org/apache/commons/logging/LogFactory
> >> [INFO]
> >>
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > ------
> >> [INFO] Trace
> >> java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError:
> >> org/apache/commons/logging/LogFactory
> >>         at
> >>
> > org.apache.geronimo.plugin.packaging.PackageBuilder.<clinit>
> > (PackageBuilder.java:49)
> >>         at
> >> sun.reflect.NativeConstructorAccessorImpl.newInstance0(Native
> >> Method)
> >>         at
> >>
> > sun.reflect.NativeConstructorAccessorImpl.newInstance
> > (NativeConstructorAccessorImpl.java:
> >>    What is this due to?
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >> Anita
> >>
> >> --- anita kulshreshtha <a_kulshre@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> David J,
> >>>      Thanks. Comments inline...
> >>>
> >>> --- David Jencks <david_jencks@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> anita kulshreshtha <a_kulshre@yahoo.com> wrote: Hi
> >>>> David,
> >>>>    I have few questions related to
> >>>> geronimo-packaging-plugin:
> >>>> 1. The j2ee-server configuration has
> >>>> geronimo-gbean-deployer.car declared as a
> >>> dependency
> >>>> whereas rmi-naming.car is an import. IIUC, the
> >>> first
> >>>> one is a parent configuration and each additional
> >>>> parent is defined using import. Is this convention
> >>>> followed throughout? Why is it necessary to
> >>>> distinguish between the two?
> >>>>
> >>>> geronimo-gbean-deployer is a dependency because it
> >>>> is needed to run the packaging plugin for this
> >>> plan.
> >>>>  it is definitely NOT a parent, it is not needed
> >>> to
> >>>> start a geronimo server that includes the
> >>>> j2ee-server configuration.
> >>>      I see.. a lot has changed from the days of
> >>> o/a/g/Deployer etc. Now j2ee-server is the base
> >>> configuration. What is j2ee-system-experimental
> >>> configuration?
> >>>
> >>> Thnaks
> >>> Anita
> >>>>
> >>>> 2. We add all the imports/dependencies to plan.xml
> >>>> for
> >>>> constructing the classpath. This classpath is used
> >>>> to
> >>>> package the car. Sometime the classpath is also
> >>> put
> >>>> in
> >>>> MANIFEST.MF (for example j2ee-system). Why is this
> >>>> not
> >>>> done for j2ee-server?
> >>>>
> >>>> The entries in the manifest classpath are only
> >>>> needed for the "root" configurations that are used
> >>>> to boot a  server.  At present these are the
> >>>> j2ee-system and client-system (I might have
> >>>> forgotten something used for a tool, perhaps
> >>>> shutdown?)  Currently the Daemon (and subclasses
> >>>> such as ClientCommandLine) clear the dependency
> >>> list
> >>>> on any configurations they boot (start first).
> >>>> We've wanted for a long time to eliminate the need
> >>>> for the manifest classpath, and Dain has some
> >>> ideas
> >>>> how to do it: basically we need to start up a
> >>> "boot
> >>>> repository".  This will also let us remove a lot
> >>> of
> >>>> the jars from lib.  We are putting the
> >>> dependencies
> >>>> into the plan mostly so that all the plans include
> >>>> their dependencies generated from project.xml,
> >>> even
> >>>> thought they aren't being used for the boot
> >>>> configurations.
> >>>>
> >>>> 3. How is the generated plan.xml used later on? If
> >>>> we
> >>>> put the classpath in the MANIFEST.MF, do we still
> >>>> need
> >>>> to add imports and dependencies to plan.xml?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> No, but as noted above we are including them as
> >>>> documentation and as an inspiration to get rid of
> >>>> the need for manifest classpath.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks
> >>>> Anita
> >>>>
> >>> <snip>
> >>>> thanks
> >>>> david jencks
> >>>>
> >>>> __________________________________________________
> >>>> Do You Yahoo!?
> >>>> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> >>>> protection around
> >>>> http://mail.yahoo.com
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> __________________________________________________
> >>> Do You Yahoo!?
> >>> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> >>> protection around
> >>> http://mail.yahoo.com
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> __________________________________________________
> >> Do You Yahoo!?
> >> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> >> http://mail.yahoo.com
> >>
> >
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> > http://mail.yahoo.com
>
>

Mime
View raw message