geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Aaron Mulder" <ammul...@alumni.princeton.edu>
Subject Re: console & deployer dependencies
Date Tue, 05 Sep 2006 13:49:26 GMT
On 9/4/06, Bill Dudney <bdudney@apache.org> wrote:
> Now making sure I understood what you said the cause of the error
> message is. Since the jetty-deployer is 'provided' scope it is not
> added explicitly to the class loader for the console. The jetty-
> deloyer has the interface and impl for JettyWebAppContext. Since the
> jar that this interface is in is not explicitly added to the
> console's class path (because of 'provided' if I understand
> correctly) it barfs.

I'm not sure what the point is of listing it as "provided", if that's
what we're currently doing.  I'm pretty sure it's not "provided" so we
might as well either not list it or list it as a regular dependency.
We should also make sure to do the same thing for the Tomcat and Jetty
console modules, just each with their respective JARs.

Note that it's not a "big barf" -- it just means we won't be able to
call server-specific methods using the interface that couldn't be
loaded (only the generic methods in the superinterface).  That's not
necessarily disastrous, but it would be nice if we could avoid it.  It
depends on whether we'd normally want to be able to use the extra
methods or not.

I guess there's also a third option, which is to get rid of any
functionality in the server-specific intrefaces (putting everything in
the generic interface) and force each server to just throw an
UnsupportedOperationException for any methods that it can't handle.

Thanks,
     Aaron

> On Sep 4, 2006, at 8:54 AM, Aaron Mulder wrote:
>
> > It's actually the proxy manager that produces those messages.  It
> > means that the console asked for a proxy to some GBean, and some of
> > the interfaces implemented by that GBean weren't available in the
> > caller's (the console's) class loader.
> >
> > It would be nice to have a larger discussion about how to handle this.
> > For example, do we package all management interfaces in separate JARs
> > from the core libraries (Jetty, Tomcat, ActiveMQ, etc.) so that the
> > console can add only the interfaces to its class loader?  Or are we OK
> > with the console just adding the full implementation JARs for
> > everything to its class path?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >     Aaron
> >
> > On 9/4/06, Bill Dudney <bdudney@apache.org> wrote:
> >> Hi All,
> >>
> >> The consoles (tomcat & jetty) are spewing warning messages like this;
> >>
> >> 08:00:18,511 WARN  [BasicProxyManager] Could not load interface
> >> org.apache.geronimo.jetty.JettyWebAppContext in provided ClassLoader
> >> for org.apache.geronimo.configs/welcome-jetty/1.2-SNAPSHOT/car?
> >> J2EEApplication=null,j2eeType=WebModule,name=org.apache.geronimo.conf
> >> igs
> >> /welcome-jetty/1.2-SNAPSHOT/car
> >>
> >> To fix it we can simply remove the <scope>provided</scope> from
the
> >> <artifactId>{jetty,tomcat}-deployer</artifactId> dependencies in
the
> >> webconsole-{jetty,tomcat}/pom.xml.
> >>
> >> Could someone who knows more about the console than me please review
> >> the patch (GERONIMO-2344.bdudney-2.patch) here;
> >>
> >> http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2344
> >>
> >> And apply it if it makes sense?
> >>
> >> Thanks!
> >>
> >> -bd-
> >>
>
>

Mime
View raw message