geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sachin Patel <sppat...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Improve 'Geronimo' Development
Date Fri, 03 Nov 2006 15:25:10 GMT
Hi Aaron,

I think this is different.  I'm not talking about developing  
applications for Geronimo, but developing Geronimo itself.  Yes, I'm  
planning to use the in-place support in conjunction with what I plan  
for  GERONIMO-1526 to improve application development for Geronimo.

On Nov 3, 2006, at 10:00 AM, Aaron Mulder wrote:

> Have you considered using the in-place deployment features to load
> classes from target/classes or something like that?  I know for
> example IDEA can generate an exploded WAR on each build which you
> could deploy as an in-place deployment...
>
> Thanks,
>       Aaron
>
> On 11/3/06, Sachin Patel <sppatel2@gmail.com> wrote:
>> So since I've been working on Geronimo, one of the most annoying  
>> things
>> developing Geronimo in an IDE is the overhead involved between  
>> modifing code
>> and being able to test the code.  For a single line change you  
>> have to
>> rebuild and install the module, rebuild the assembly, and re- 
>> extract and
>> relaunch the server image.  This is needed since Geronimo loads  
>> classes from
>> the server repository and currently cannot from the local m2 repo  
>> or from
>> the "target/classes" directory itself.
>>
>> Well to ease the developer experience I think we need to change  
>> that.  As a
>> first step, I'd like to see if we can hook into geronimo a  
>> "developers
>> module" that the repository code can delegate over to to load from  
>> the m2
>> repo.  That itself would be an improvement and developers could  
>> simply
>> rebuild the module without having to regen a new assembly.  A step  
>> beyond
>> that would be the ability to treat the source tree as a repo, and  
>> geronimo
>> load directly from target/classes, this is tricker since the  
>> modules in the
>> source tree don't follow a groupId/artifact/version/type  
>> convention so some
>> sort of intelligent mapping would have to be done.  In theory,  
>> this would
>> give us the ability to simply compile a module (with an IDE  
>> compiler and not
>> maven) and simply re-start the server.
>>
>> Would this be an effort that would be valuable to the community?
>>
>> If so, if there are suggestions on how to go about implementing  
>> either the
>> first or second solution, please give your input.
>>
>> thx
>>
>>
>> -sachin
>>
>>


-sachin



Mime
View raw message