geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Hernan Cunico <hcun...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Release Geronimo 2.0.1 (rc1)
Date Fri, 17 Aug 2007 15:33:50 GMT
Thanks Paul for such detailed explanation, I still have a lot to learn on the plugin architecture.

Cheers!
Hernan

Paul McMahan wrote:
> Hernan,  what you are seeing is expected and is a side effect of the way 
> that we test release candidates [1].  For a given geronimo release there 
> are three parts of the plugin system that need to be tested:
> 
> 1.) the plugin installer
> 2.) the plugins
> 3.) the plugin catalog
> 
> Right now the 2.0 plugin catalog points at the 2.0-SNAPSHOT plugins 
> because those are the only ones available in a public maven repo.   This 
> allows us to test if #1 (the plugin installer) can do its job 
> correctly.  And as you have found the plugins are downloaded and 
> installed correctly.
> 
> But in order for us to properly test #2 and #3 we need for the plugins 
> to be deployed to a maven repo.  Here is a chicken and egg problem, 
> because the plugins are not deployed until the release candidate has 
> passed its vote.  So, unless we decide to change our plugin 
> infrastructure to be less dependent on maven, or change the way we test 
> release candidates we will need to sometimes overlook the type of error 
> you saw where the plugin is downloaded and installed OK but it won't 
> start due to some incompatibility with the server.  I try to remember to 
> point out during a vote that some plugins (which are usually SNAPSHOT) 
> may not work in the release candidate [2].
> 
> After a release candidate has passed its vote and its plugins are 
> deployed I usually update the catalog to point at the "real" plugins.  
> The catalog is maintained online at geronimo.apache.org, so we can 
> update that outside of the release process.  But there is a bit of 
> finger crossing going on here since the plugins themselves are part of 
> the officially released bits and have already been deployed.   If they 
> don't work then we may have to crank out another release or remove them 
> from the catalog.
> 
> So far we have considered the risk of releasing broken plugins as 
> necessary due to the amount of overhead in the release process [3].  As 
> some aspects of our server such as the console move towards relying on 
> the plugin system for core functionality we may need to revisit what's 
> in the release candidate and/or how we vote on it.
> 
> 
> Best wishes,
> Paul
> 
> [1] http://www.nabble.com/1.2-Fit-and-Finish-tf2543870s134.html#a7114633
> [2] 
> http://www.nabble.com/-DISCUSS--Geronimo-2.0-%28rc1%29-Release-tf4235631s134.html#a12059054

> 
> [3] http://www.nabble.com/1.2-Fit-and-Finish-tf2543870s134.html#a7144688
> 
> 
> On Aug 16, 2007, at 10:30 AM, Hernan Cunico wrote:
> 
>> Anybody seeing plugin issues, specially when starting them?
>> Could it be a versioning problem, I get similar errors on both Jetty 
>> and Tomcat
>>
>> - Unable to start configuration org.apache.geronimo.configs
>> - org.apache.geronimo.kernel.config.InvalidConfigException: Unknown 
>> start exception
>> - org.apache.geronimo.gbean.InvalidConfigurationException: Getter 
>> method not found Attribute Name: URLFor, Type: class java.net.URL, 
>> GBeanInstance: Jetty WebApplication Context
>>
>> Cheers!
>> Hernan
>>
>> Matt Hogstrom wrote:
>>> Initial discuss thread
> 
> 

Mime
View raw message