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: Peculiar things about the latest trunk build wrt ActiveMQ
Date Wed, 13 Sep 2006 21:50:39 GMT

On Sep 13, 2006, at 7:34 AM, Aaron Mulder wrote:

> I would definitely say that we want to keep the TranQL database
> connection pool RAR in Little G (what app doesn't use a database?).

We don't need the rar  to get system database, just the system  
database car file.  Assuming that people want to deploy more derby  
instances may be a bit presumptuous.  You only need the rar to make  
it easy for the user to deploy addtional stuff.

> We don't need the ActiveMQ RAR, though, because we don't include JMS
> in Little G.
>
We wouldn't need it even if we did include amq jms.

david jencks


> Thanks,
>      Aaron
>
> On 9/12/06, Joe Bohn <joe.bohn@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>> David Jencks wrote:
>> >
>> > On Sep 12, 2006, at 5:01 PM, Joe Bohn wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >> Thanks Jason.  I had just remembered about the boilerplate   
>> assemblies
>> >> and noticed the activemq-rar in there.
>> >>
>> >> I don't know why we would need the activemq-rar in the  
>> boilderplate
>> >> for minimal.  David, can you give some more details?
>> >
>> >
>> > I guess I was wrong, oh keeper of the minimal :)  If we don't ship
>> > system-database with minimal we don't need the derby rars  
>> either.   All
>> > the rars are there only as a convenience for someone who might   
>> want to
>> > deploy an additional instance: none are needed to run the  shipping
>> > server.  Joe, do you think we should leave them all out of   
>> minimal?
>> > I'd be fine with that.
>>
>> I guess my take is that we shouldn't include any of the RARs in  
>> minimal.
>>   Jason, would you like to do that or shall I?
>>
>> This also then raises the question of how the RARs will get  
>> included in
>> the little-G growing to big-G scenario (or the framework to whatever
>> scenario which is how I stumbled upon it).  Perhaps we can add some
>> artificial dependencies (for example maybe from system-database to  
>> the
>> derby RARs?).  Or we can just require that they be pulled  
>> manually.  Any
>> thoughts?
>>
>> Joe
>>
>> >
>> > thanks
>> > david jencks
>> >
>> >>
>> >> I'll open a JIRA on the deps.
>> >>
>> >> Joe
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> jason.dillon@gmail.com wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> The rar deps need to be excluded... Open issue for that which  
>> I  will
>> >>> fix shortly. And David Jencks said to add the rars to the   
>> minimal
>> >>> boilerplate, so I did. If that is not correct we can move  it  
>> to the
>> >>> j2ee boilerplate. --jason
>> >>>   -----Original Message-----
>> >>> From: Joe Bohn <joe.bohn@earthlink.net>
>> >>> Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2006 16:51:17 To:Geronimo Dev
>> >>> <dev@geronimo.apache.org>
>> >>> Subject: Peculiar things about the latest trunk build wrt  
>> ActiveMQ
>> >>> I noticed two peculiar things about the latest trunk build and
>> >>> activeMQ.
>> >>> 1)  The image size of the activeMQ rar file is now huge ... going
>> >>> from something like 1 meg to a present 7.5 meg:
>> >>> 7,508,415 ge-activemq-rar-1.2-SNAPSHOT.rar
>> >>> 2)  This is now included in all assemblies when it was previously
>> >>> excluded from the little-G assemblies.
>> >>> Does anybody have any idea on the size issue or the change  
>> that  may
>> >>> have caused #2 above?
>> >>> Joe
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>


Mime
View raw message