geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Jencks <david_jen...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: svn commit: r568632 - /geronimo/server/trunk/assemblies/geronimo-framework/pom.xml
Date Wed, 22 Aug 2007 15:52:57 GMT
I would like to see all the assemblies except the framework assembly  
be constructed by adding plugins to the framework assembly.  Just  
because there has been no progress on this goal in the last year...

I think we are pretty close to having enough pieces lined up so we  
can actually do this, so I'm very definitely against removing this  
assembly.  We could remove all the others to spur on this process :-)

thanks
david jencks

On Aug 22, 2007, at 8:34 AM, Paul McMahan wrote:

> Before removing it I'm wondering, in what scenario(s) would we use  
> the framework assembly?    One scenario that comes to mind is an  
> installer that lays down the framework and then installs plugins on  
> top of it for a truly customized server.   The minimal assembly  
> already seems to fit that scenario pretty well though, assuming the  
> installer could just remove the web container in the uncommon(?)  
> cases where its not needed.   So the minimal assembly could be the  
> base line for an installer plus double as a preconfigured assembly  
> that serves as the low-end for our users (i.e. no installer  
> required).  Plus, since the minimal assembly has a web container we  
> could use a web UI for the installer instead of some native app  
> like we used to have -- actually the "installer" is more like a  
> plugin configurer from that point of view.
>
> What other scenarios can we think of where a framework assembly  
> could be useful?   And do the recent advancements in GShell (very  
> cool btw!!) play into this discussion?
>
> Best wishes,
> Paul
>
>
> On Aug 22, 2007, at 11:12 AM, Joe Bohn wrote:
>
>> Hey Donald (and others) ... Is anybody actually using this  
>> framework "ie. containerless" assembly?  I was just thinking of  
>> removing this assembly prior to seeing this change.
>>
>> At one point in time this was going to be our most minimal  
>> assembly (without even a web container) for building up a  
>> pluggable server. However, it seems like the tide is changing to  
>> always expect a web container in the smallest framework assembly  
>> (ie. the minimal assemblies we already have).  There's been a lot  
>> of cool work on the pluggable console and it seems like are  
>> heading in a direction to make this the primary interface for  
>> building and managing the server ... but of course it requires a  
>> web container as a minimal starting point.
>>
>> So, the question is:  Should we remove the framework assembly and  
>> work on the assumption that our most minimal assemblies should  
>> always include a web container?
>>
>> Joe
>>
>>
>> dwoods@apache.org wrote:
>>> Author: dwoods
>>> Date: Wed Aug 22 07:47:42 2007
>>> New Revision: 568632
>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=568632&view=rev
>>> Log:
>>> adding missing depend on geronimo-boilerplate-minimal
>>> Modified:
>>>     geronimo/server/trunk/assemblies/geronimo-framework/pom.xml
>>> Modified: geronimo/server/trunk/assemblies/geronimo-framework/ 
>>> pom.xml
>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/geronimo/server/trunk/ 
>>> assemblies/geronimo-framework/pom.xml? 
>>> rev=568632&r1=568631&r2=568632&view=diff
>>> ==================================================================== 
>>> ==========
>>> --- geronimo/server/trunk/assemblies/geronimo-framework/pom.xml  
>>> (original)
>>> +++ geronimo/server/trunk/assemblies/geronimo-framework/pom.xml  
>>> Wed Aug 22 07:47:42 2007
>>> @@ -40,6 +40,12 @@
>>>      <dependencies>
>>>                   <dependency>
>>> +            <groupId>org.apache.geronimo.assemblies</groupId>
>>> +            <artifactId>geronimo-boilerplate-minimal</artifactId>
>>> +            <version>${version}</version>
>>> +        </dependency>
>>> +
>>> +        <dependency>
>>>              <groupId>org.apache.geronimo.configs</groupId>
>>>              <artifactId>j2ee-system</artifactId>
>>>              <version>${version}</version>
>


Mime
View raw message