geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Aaron Mulder" <>
Subject Re: Upgrade Pluto to 1.1? (was Re: What are we using Castor for?)
Date Sat, 03 Mar 2007 16:10:40 GMT
Pluto 1.1 integration would be great, and would allow much more
reasonable dynamic additions of screens to the console.  Someone just
needs to do the work.  :)

I expect Jetspeed 2 would do the same, but I think Pluto would be much
more lightweight, so I would think it would be preferable for the
console, whereas Jetspeed and Liferay would be preferable for people
developing portal applications.

I believe David J did some initial work along these lines a while back.


On 3/3/07, Jason Dillon <> wrote:
> On Feb 13, 2007, at 5:49 PM, David Jencks wrote:
> > It's used by pluto for the admin console.  No idea if more recent
> > would work.
> >
> > We could upgrade pluto too if anyone has some time to investigate
> I wonder if anyone from the Pluto team would want to help with
> that... looks like 1.1 is not compatible with 1.0.1... but also looks
> like that might not be a bad thing:
> <snip>
> Pluto 1.1 introduces a new container architecture. If you are
> embedding Pluto in your portal, realize that 1.1 is not binarily
> compatible with Pluto 1.0.x.
> Pluto 1.1 aims to simplify the architecture in order to make it more
> user and developer friendly. You should find Pluto 1.1 easier to get
> started with, easier to understand, and easier to embed with your
> portal. Your feedback regarding how far we've come is always welcome
> on the user and developer mailing lists!
> </snip>
> I don't know much abort portal muck, so I can't really show how much
> better 1.1 might be... but I know that there have been some issues
> with the console asis now to get stuff like plugin porlets installed
> dynamically... perhaps 1.1 can help solve some of these issues?
> Anyone know?
> --jason

View raw message