geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Jencks <david_jen...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: Move blocker GERONIMO-1960 to 1.1.1?
Date Wed, 24 May 2006 06:04:59 GMT
+1 on excluding this from 1.1.  I agree it's not a blocker.

I think client-corba needs a dependency on client-security, I thought  
it was there.  I'll try to investigate on the plane tomorrow.

I expected you to fix this by modifying the ServiceConfigBuilder to  
check that the gbean reference was satisfied in the ancestor set when  
it is reading the xml.  This is what the other builders do for e.g.  
resource-refs, and I think it would be simple and non-invasive.   
However, in any case I don't think this is a blocker.... the worst  
that can happen is that you get an error later rather than sooner,  
you get essentially the same effect either way.

thanks
david jencks

On May 23, 2006, at 7:55 PM, Dain Sundstrom wrote:

> I finished the patch for GERONIMO-1960 (http://issues.apache.org/ 
> jira/browse/GERONIMO-1960), but I think it may be destabilizing and  
> should be move to 1.1.1.
>
> I added a verify method to Deployment context which is called from  
> getConfigurationData().  This method verifies the references and  
> dependencies on can be resolved.  I only try to resolve  
> dependencies and single valued references. Further, only unresolved  
> reference patterns are resolved, under the assumption that the  
> deployer created a resolved pattern correctly.   We can not  
> absolute references to beans in external modules.
>
> A couple of the client plans threw exceptions so I had to patch  
> them also, which is why I am concerned.  The client-security has  
> unnecessary and possibly incorrect module declarations and the  
> client-corba plan has a dependency on SecurityService which can't  
> be resolved since there is no dependency on client-security.  I  
> removed the former and commented out the latter.  I am not sure if  
> we need the dependency on SecurityService in client-corba, and if  
> so, I'm not sure if we can add a dependency from client-corba to  
> client-security.  David Jencks any help here would be appreciated.
>
> Anyway, I don't think this is issue actually a blocker issue, and  
> think we can safely move it to 1.1.1 (or 1.2 if my 1.1.1 proposal  
> flops).
>
> -dain
>


Mime
View raw message