geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Prasad Kashyap" <goyathlay.geron...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: J2G future positioning
Date Tue, 30 Oct 2007 15:04:32 GMT
I'm with Paul on this. I envision a Migrate2Geronimo Toolkit that will
consist of a suite of  individual plugins (for Eclipse and G), each
handling the migration from a specific appserver to G. Of course, all
these may depend on a base or common plugin. But  the user will only
deal with the plugin relevant to him.  He will not have to install one
big huge uber migrator if he only has jboss apps.

Next week, we'll look forward to Jason adding a BEA2G plugin to this
M2G Toolkit ;-)

Cheers
Prasad.


On 10/30/07, Paul McMahan <paulmcmahan@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm not in favor of generalizing the J2G Eclipse plugin into a super
> migrator that grows in complexity as we incorporate new types of
> source formats.   I think that instead we should look into factoring
> out the parts of J2G that could be used for other types migrators
> into a separate Eclipse plugin.   Then J2G could remain as J2G but
> could prereq this new Eclipse plugin, as would any other new
> migrators we create.
>
> Best wishes,
> Paul
>
>
> On Oct 29, 2007, at 11:32 AM, Tim McConnell wrote:
>
> > Hi, Does anyone have any thoughts as to how we'll position the J2G
> > plugin in the future ?? I understand now that in its initial
> > iteration that it is narrowly scoped to work for JBoss specific
> > migrations only (thus the JBoss in the name). However, it seems if
> > we want to eventually enhance it as a more generic tool for
> > migrating multiple applications to Geronimo (which I would hope we
> > would), it might be a good time now to reconsider a more generic
> > and/or appropriate name. Any thoughts ??
> >
> > --
> > Thanks,
> > Tim McConnell
>
>

Mime
View raw message