geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joe Bohn <>
Subject Re: geronimo plugin schema (longish)
Date Tue, 24 Jul 2007 19:55:20 GMT

Paul McMahan wrote:
> On Jul 19, 2007, at 10:42 PM, Lin Sun wrote:
>> After a plugin is published, a user finds it also works with a 
>> different version of geronimo (without any other code change), so a 
>> user would modify the plugin's xml file to add the newer version 
>> geronimo there.  Should the user also change the version of the plugin 
>> itself in this case?
> Yeah that situation could be a little confusing when using this schema.  
> The versions of geronimo that the plugin supports are in 
> <geronimo-version> elements.   But the version of the plugin itself is 
> implicit in its <module-id> which uses standard maven naming conventions 
> (group / id / version / type).   So if a single version of the plugin 
> works in multiple versions of geronimo then a sample catalog entry might 
> look like:
>     <plugin>
>                ...
>             <plugin-module>
>                 <module-id></module-id>
>                 <geronimo-version>2.0</geronimo-version>
>             </plugin-module>
>             <plugin-module>
>                 <module-id></module-id>
>                 <geronimo-version>2.1</geronimo-version>
>             </plugin-module>
>     </plugin>

I don't supposed there is anyway to split the module-id out to a single 
place and then specify all of the applicable geronimo-versions to be 
associated with the plugin?  It looks like it would be very easy to make 
a mistake here.  What would happen if a different module if was 
specified for geronimo-version 2.0 vs. geronimo-version 2.1?


> Maybe for the sake of clarity the plugin version should be explicitly 
> declared by introducing a new <version> element as a child of 
> <plugin>.   But I waffle on that because it creates an opportunity to 
> have a different version embedded in the module-id.  That might prove 
> useful in some contrived scenario but it seems dangerous.
>> Also, any consideration of how plugins can work with geronimo and 
>> other products who uese geronimo?
> Actually the main goal here is to make it easier for application 
> developers to set up and maintain their own plugin repositories. Right 
> now I think its a little burdensome and we can make some simple 
> improvements like these schema changes that will help a lot.
> Best wishes,
> Paul

View raw message