geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Donald Woods <dwo...@apache.org>
Subject Re: geronimo plugin schema (longish)
Date Fri, 20 Jul 2007 13:15:20 GMT
You're not confused.  That was my point/question of does it really make sense 
to have one massive geronimo-plugins.xml for several releases....

I +1 the idea of updating the schema, I'm just wondering how we can use it 
from a build perspective....


-Donald

Jason Warner wrote:
> 
> 
> On 7/19/07, *Donald Woods* <dwoods@apache.org 
> <mailto:dwoods@apache.org>> wrote:
> 
>     Sounds like a good idea, but does this help or hurt us as far as
>     trying to
>     automatically generate the geronimo-plugins.xml after a
>     build?  Seems like
>     keeping multiple releases in one XML file is going to become a PITA
>     after a
>     couple of releases....
> 
>     Why not create a separate geronimo-plugins.xml for each major
>     release stream
>     (like 2.0/2.0.x and then 2.1/2.1.x)?  Wouldn't that be easier to
>     maintain,
>     especially if we reorg the modules/configs in 2.1 for the new
>     pluggable admin
>     Portlets and move unnecessary code out into optional plugins....
> 
> 
> Isn't that what we do already?  IIUC, we currently do have a different 
> geronimo-plugin.xml
> for each release.  I think the whole point of what Paul wants to do is 
> to move away from that.
> I might be confused, though.  It's early :)
> 
>     -Donald
> 
>     Paul McMahan wrote:
>      > I've been thinking about some changes to the geronimo-plugin
>     schema to
>      > make plugin catalogs less verbose and easier to maintain across
>     versions
>      > of Geronimo.  The problem with the current schema is that some of
>     the
>      > plugin metadata that is sensitive to the geronimo version is
>     grouped in
>      > <geronimo-versions> elements, but some is not.
>      >
>      > Plugins are often sensitive to the geronimo version they were
>     developed
>      > under since they typically rely on lots of container services.  
>     Besides
>      > that, in general plugins only work in the version of geronimo
>     they were
>      > exported from (or car plugin version).  So this schema limitation
>     makes
>      > it difficult to create one catalog that supports several versions of
>      > geronimo without having a lot of redundant plugin entries.  Right
>     now we
>      > maintain separate catalogs at http://geronimo.apache.org/plugins for
>      > each version of geronimo because of this limitation.
>      >
>      > I attached a proposed schema here :
>      >   https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-3330
>      >
>      > Using that new schema a plugin entry would look something like:
>      >     <plugin>
>      >             <name/>
>      >             <category/>
>      >             <description/>
>      >             <url/>
>      >             <author/>
>      >             <license/>
>      >             <plugin-module>
>      >                 <module-id/>
>      >                 <hash/>
>      >                 <geronimo-version/>
>      >                 <jvm-version-version/>
>      >                 <prerequisite>
>      >                         <id/>
>      >                         <resource-type/>
>      >                         <description/>
>      >                 </prerequisite>
>      >                 <dependency/>
>      >                 <obsoletes/>
>      >                 <source-repository/>
>      >             </plugin-module>
>      >             <plugin-module>
>      >                  ...
>      >             </plugin-module>
>      >     </plugin>
>      >
>      > Note that the metadata that is sensitive to the geronimo version is
>      > encapsulated in a <plugin-module> element.  And a single <plugin>
can
>      > several <plugin-module> elements ( e.g. one for each version of
>     geronimo
>      > it supports).
>      >
>      > While making this schema change two other things I was considering is
>      > factoring the plugin code out of geronimo-system into a separate
>     config
>      > and using JAXB to handle the XML processing instead of the sax
>     code it
>      > currently uses.    Feedback is welcome.
>      >
>      > Best wishes,
>      > Paul
>      >
>      >
> 
> 

Mime
View raw message