geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joe Bohn <>
Subject Re: Dojo Toolkit inclusion to Geronimo
Date Tue, 19 Sep 2006 17:45:56 GMT

It looks like you might be having the same problem that I initially had 
where my commits didn't show up on the geronimo-scm list (at least I 
haven't seen your referenced commit appear on the list yet).

You need to get somebody to add your apache id to the -allow list for 
scm@geronimo.  Brett Porter helped me :-)


Paul McMahan wrote:
> OK based on discussion here on the dev list and in GERONIMO-2333 I
> just committed the code for GERONIMO-2406 into trunk rev 447903.  This
> introduces the Dojo files as a new webapp into the server and creates
> a dependency from the console onto this app so that Chris can
> reference it from the JMX Debug portlet at /dojo instead of checking
> in a private copy for the console.  When an application is deployed
> into Geronimo and the console is already deployed it can use the
> shared copy.  Otherwise it can install the Dojo webapp as a plugin --
> AFAIK all the files are in place to generate the plugin I just have to
> make sure that it gets out to a plugin repository, etc.
> I will add a wiki page to describe all this.
> This is my first commit while Geronimo has just gone back to CTR so I
> hope I have not botched something up.  If I made any rookie mistakes
> then please be gentle and I promise to fix it :-)
> Best wishes,
> Paul
> On 9/13/06, Paul McMahan <> wrote:
>> Gianny,  I agree that the JMX Viewer portlet Chris has contributed is
>> fantastic and more people should take a look at it!  I also agree that
>> we should think about how the Dojo files are checked in -- directly in
>> the console vs. as a separate module.  I was thinking about creating a
>> separate web app containing the Dojo files that could be shared across
>> all web apps in Geronimo and managed separately from them.  The thread
>> Chris referenced above discusses the idea in more detail:
>> Maybe the time is right to move forward on that idea (or some variant)
>> and let the JMX viewer portlet be the first exploiter.  Or if Chris'
>> current implementation is integrated as-is then we discussed
>> retrofitting it to work this way later -- see the comments in
>> GERONIMO-2333.
>> Best wishes,
>> Paul
>> On 9/13/06, Gianny Damour <> wrote:
>> > Hi Chris,
>> >
>> > The JMX Viewer portlet is finally working for me. Actually, it seems
>> > that due to a Dojo known issue, this portlet does not work with
>> > Safari :(; having said that, it works really nicely, and I really
>> > mean really nicely, with IE.
>> >
>> > Regarding your patch, I believe that this is a large piece of work;
>> > unfortunately, I cannot appreciate it as this is the first time that
>> > I am seeing dojo in action. Also, I think that instead of checking in
>> > the dojo files directly at the right location, we should check in a
>> > tar.ball of these files and expand it upon build of the module. I
>> > think that this is better because this way we do know which files are
>> > dojo specifics (this is a minor detail). What do you think?
>> >
>> > It would be cool if other people could have a look to this patch; for
>> > sure, it really deserves it!
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Gianny
>> >

View raw message