geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Sachin Patel" <sppat...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Geronimo Eclipse Plugin (GEP) questions
Date Wed, 24 Oct 2007 18:35:40 GMT
(1) I think N-2 is a good rule to go by.

On 10/23/07, Tim McConnell <tim.mcconne@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi everyone, I have a couple questions I'd like to discuss about the
> Geronimo
> Eclipse plugin:
>
> 1. How many versions of the Geronimo server should we continue to
> simultaneously
> support in the Geronimo Eclipse plugin ??
> 2. What level of support should we provide in the Eclipse plugin for the
> Geronimo 1.2 Beta ??
>
> My thoughts and/or opinions are as follows (simply to start the
> discussions):
>
> 1. The plugin now has support for four Geronimo releases (i.e., 1, 1.1.1,
> 1.2,
> and 2.0). I would like to support only three versions at a time. This
> would
> still allow an upward migration path for people who want to migrate their
> projects from older to new versions (which is apparently one of the major
> reasons for providing support for multiple versions to begin with). I feel
> though that support for only three versions at a time would facilitate a
> more
> stable (and smaller) code base, it would mitigate some of the test
> scenario
> permutations inherit with multiple version support, and ease the
> implementation
> transitions from one release of the GEP to another. We've had and continue
> to
> have difficulties supporting the Geronimo 2.0.2 deployment plans in the
> GEP,
> which I'm confident will finally be rectified in the next maintenance
> release of
> the GEP, but it's only exacerbated by supporting so many versions.
>
> 2. I would like to start to untangle some of the interdependencies we now
> have
> with the various features in the plugin in the upcoming GEP  maintenance
> release. I know very little about the Geronimo 1.2 Beta, but I get the
> sense
> that it is more of a "one-off" rather than a nature progression from 1.1.1to
> 2.0.x, and I just wonder though how much the 1.2 support in the plugin is
> really
> being used. If it's not being used, I would actually like to remove the
> 1.2 Beta
> code from the plugin in the upcoming maintenance release for the reasons
> I've
> mentioned above.
>
> Thoughts ??
>
> --
> Thanks,
> Tim McConnell
>
>

Mime
View raw message