Mailing-List: contact dev-help@geronimo.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@geronimo.apache.org
Received-SPF: error (idunn.apache.osuosl.org: domain apache.org from
 66.116.97.229 cause and error)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.2)
In-Reply-To: <20060907023122.45982.qmail@web31706.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <20060907023122.45982.qmail@web31706.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed
Message-Id: <28F368E1-C304-4104-B92B-7119106192F3@apache.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Bill Dudney <bdudney@apache.org>
Subject: Re: console & deployer dependencies
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2006 07:14:02 -0600
To: dev@geronimo.apache.org

Hi Anita,

Any luck? Any further thoughts? I'm happy to help in anyway I can to  
get this resolved.

Thanks,

-bd-

On Sep 6, 2006, at 8:31 PM, anita kulshreshtha wrote:

> inline..
>
> --- Bill Dudney <bdudney@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi Anita,
>>
>> initial patch? The patch I posted had a single deleted line from each
>>
>> pom.
>
>    If it does not break anything else, I am OK with it. You should
> delete o/a/g/configs directory in .m2 repo, and build all the configs.
>
>
> 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
>
>      Thanks for the info. It is indeed a lot.. I will get back to you.
>
> Thanks
> Anita
>>
>> 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
>>
>>
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com