geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Bill Dudney <bdud...@apache.org>
Subject Re: console & deployer dependencies
Date Wed, 06 Sep 2006 18:12:41 GMT
Hi Anita,

initial patch? The patch I posted had a single deleted line from each  
pom. Just trying to understand the question.

On the j2ee-deployer being added; That was a result of other issues  
with dependencies being missed. Starting with (I believe)

http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2326

There were many many problems solved by adding that parent config  
without causing other issues. I believe the whole conversation took  
place in that JIRA so hopefully there is enough info there to inform  
you.

As to the #2 issue/question I'm not sure, but from my current vantage  
point with more experience of car stacking perhaps getting the tomcat- 
deployer config correct would fix both 2326 & this issue.

Thanks,

-bd-


On Sep 6, 2006, at 9:58 AM, anita kulshreshtha wrote:

> Bill,
>    The webconsole-tomcat config differs from the original patch. To
> answer your question correctly, I need to understand  why:
> 1. The j2ee-deployer config was added as a parent configuration.
> 2. The tomcat-deployer config was changed so that tomcat config is not
> a parent of tomcat-deployer config.
>    I am searching the archives/jiras. I need to do some testing..
>
> Thanks
> Anita
>
> --- Bill Dudney <bdudney@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> Anita,
>>
>> While the jar's are not required in the class loader, without them
>> the warning messages are printed.
>>
>> Do you have ideas about how to get rid of the warning messages and
>> keep the 'provided' scope?
>>
>> I think I prefer pushing all the methods into the 'super interface'
>> and having an UnsupportedOperationException as long as there are good
>>
>> error messages as to what has happened (i.e. 'a method was invoked on
>>
>> the Jetty container that is not supported, perhaps you wanted to use
>>
>> Tomcat instead?' or something less cheesy).
>>
>> Anyway I'm not sure of the best way to handle this but I don't like
>> the warning messages. I think they would look ominous to initial
>> users then over time users would stop worrying about warning
>> messages. Which is bad IMO.
>>
>> TTFN,
>>
>> -bd-
>>
>> On Sep 5, 2006, at 8:23 AM, anita kulshreshtha wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>> 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.
>>>
>>>      The scope=provided is used to enforce the build order for the
>>> configs, i.e the console configs are not built before the
>> jetty/tomcat
>>> deployer configs are built in a multi config build. These cars are
>> not
>>> required in the classloader.
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Anita
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 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-
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> __________________________________________________
>>> Do You Yahoo!?
>>> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
>>> http://mail.yahoo.com
>>
>>
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com


Mime
View raw message