geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Matt Hogstrom <>
Subject [DISCUSS] Geronimo 2.1 - what's next?
Date Mon, 02 Jul 2007 16:07:47 GMT
Seems like the dev list has been  a bit quiet lately as I know many  
folks have been working on getting 2.0 done and through some  
additional testing for Axis, fit and finish stuff, etc.  Although  
important, its not exactly the next generation so I thought I'd start  
this thread to get some ideas formed around the next step for AG.   
These are just my thoughts and I'm soliciting input for ideas and  

I thought I'd put my thoughts in the form of a user describing what  
they need from Geronimo.  This is based on input I've heard from  
several folks as well as users and includes some of my own ideas as  
well.  It feels like we've been chasing the specs for so long that we  
haven't fully realized some of the other awesome ideas people have  
had.  Aaron's plugin architecture is workable but not fully  
consumable, Dain's repository work and a host of other ideas.  I  
think now is the time to have some fun.    To that end here is the  
list of requirements.

Geronimo 2.1 Punch List

*Flexible framework for building server assemblies that include only  
the components needed for an application*

This means that a user could either build a custom assembly with only  
the needed parts or, alternatively, could run with all parts  
available but only start what they need.  The model is up to the user  
to decide based on their unique requirements.

*Dynamically binding needed elements*

Using the plugin architecture and Maven repo concepts one could  
install a needed element into the server by simply pointing to a  
remote repository and installing the element.  Other artifacts needed  
for execution would be obtained automagically from either the network  
or a shared filesystem as needed and based on the policies provided  
by the user.  The default mode of operation would provide the best  
user experience.

*Dynamic Console for managing installed artifacts*

Improve the console framework to allow installed artifacts to  
register a portlet for managing the configuration.  For highest level  
of flexibility a component would provide the required portlet elemtns  
and we would bind them into the navigation framework and security  
infracstructure.  We'd need a good set of docs and samples to help  
people in deploying this easy.  Ideally we would start with a minimal  
assembly and a mgmt console so that new functions could be loaded  
through the console.  I'm not sure that we'd need to have an assembly  
smaller than minimal at this point since we'd need a web container  
for the mgmt console anyway.

*Cluster Aware Mgmt Application*

For users that want to federate a number of servers together we need  
a clustering solution that will allow for configuration of nodes as  
well as autodiscovery.  This requires a clustering element for  
Geronimo that takes into account multiple clustering users  
(services).  I think Jeff has some of the foundation in GCache.

*SOA Assembly*
It would be great to have a SOA assembly (that works in a flexible  
way :) with AMQ, ServiceMix and a Tx Manager.  A LOT of people I talk  
to want something simple like a Tomcat and a Mule...let's give it to  

A really huge part of what people have talked about as being  
important is tooling integration (I've heard mostly about Eclipse and  

*OSGi and Spring*
This has been kicked around for a long time.  I was talking with  
someone who said they needed a flexible runtime that would allow them  
to wire in OSGi bundles (seems like the traction is increasing) and  
use Spring for the configuration.  People smarter than I can weigh in  
on this area but this is seems to get Independent Software Vendors  
(ISV's) all hot under the collar.  If we could deliver this with the  
flexible server stuff I think we'd have a huge swell of interest.

Other thoughts?

View raw message