geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Matt Hogstrom <m...@hogstrom.org>
Subject Re: Peculiar things about the latest trunk build wrt ActiveMQ
Date Wed, 13 Sep 2006 19:28:19 GMT
TranQL makes sense for the connection pool mgmt.  I assume that is  
what you mean Aaron ?

On Sep 13, 2006, at 9:32 AM, Joe Bohn wrote:

> Well, we don't include tranql in little-g either.  Are you  
> suggesting that we pull that it as well?
>
> Joe
>
>
> 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 ActiveMQ RAR, though, because we don't include JMS
>> in Little G.
>> 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
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>
>

Matt Hogstrom
matt@hogstrom.org




Mime
View raw message