Mailing-List: contact dev-help@geronimo.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@geronimo.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: local policy)
Message-Id: <9C8E57B3-A6A3-41C8-8ACD-7BCF07E03E12@hogstrom.org>
From: Matt Hogstrom <matt@hogstrom.org>
To: dev@geronimo.apache.org
In-Reply-To: <C3E97CEB-683D-4F7A-B90E-22A52F3B0887@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v915)
Subject: Re: structure of GShell commands
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2007 08:22:54 -0500
References: <C3E97CEB-683D-4F7A-B90E-22A52F3B0887@gmail.com>

If GShell would be targeted at more servers than G then I think these  
commands should be under geronimo.  If not, then I think a flat  
structure makes sense.

On Dec 11, 2007, at 10:04 AM, Kevan Miller wrote:

> We currently have the following structure for Geronimo GShell  
> commands:
>
> geronimo/
> 	start-server
> 	stop-server
> 	start-client
>
> deploy/
> 	install-library
> 	disconnect
> 	deploy
> 	...
>
> This doesn't make much sense to me. Let's either assume GShell is  
> used for Geronimo server or assume that GShell can be used for  
> multiple target environments, but not both...
>
> I think the current deploy/ commands should be under the geronimo  
> tree. What do others think? I think applying a bit more structure,  
> now, will minimize entropy over time...
>
> Anybody want to have a shot at proposing a command structure?
>
> --kevan
>