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: [DISCUSS] 2.1 Release
Date Tue, 06 Nov 2007 16:35:20 GMT
I thought of a couple more things we might consider trying to get  
into 2.1.

1. get rid of gbean proxies in gbean references.  IIRC Dain did some  
experiments long ago and this resulted in a noticeable speedup.  The  
problem at that time was that it broke the admin console.  I think  
the main breakage was that attribute changes weren't saved???  I was  
wondering if we could leave the machinery to create proxies in place  
but not use it for gbean references and have the admin console  
explicitly request the proxies.  Does anyone remember or know enough  
about this to comment on or refute this?

2. look up gbeans in jndi in the admin console.  I really haven't  
looked into whether this makes any sense at all, but we do now have  
the ability to bind gbeans in jndi and IIRC we did not when most of  
the console was originally written.

I doubt I will have time to work on either of these in the next  
couple weeks but I think either one would make a reasonably small and  
self contained project with noticeable benefits (particularly 1)

thanks
david jencks


On Nov 1, 2007, at 10:00 AM, Kevan Miller wrote:

> I think it's time to start discussing the particulars of a 2.1  
> release.
>
> There's been a lot of advancements made in our plugin  
> infrastructure. There's also been the pluggable console  
> enhancements. It would be good to get a release out, with these  
> capabilities. They provide a more solid platform for future  
> enhancements, I think.
>
> There's also GShell and new monitoring capabilities. I'm probably  
> missing a few other new functions.
>
> Finally, IIUC, 2.1 would be able to support a Terracotta plugin.  
> I'd also be very interested to hear what WADI capabilities that  
> could be exposed.
>
> I'm willing to bang the release manager drum. I see that Joe has  
> already started tugging on the TCK chain
>
> What do others think? How close are we to a 2.1 release? What  
> additional capabilities and bug fixes are needed? Can we wrap up  
> development activities in the next week or two?
>
> --kevan


Mime
View raw message