geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Peter Petersson <>
Subject Re: Release Roller plugin soon?
Date Wed, 20 Feb 2008 20:12:16 GMT
David Jencks wrote:
> On Feb 16, 2008, at 9:51 AM, Peter Petersson wrote:
>> David Jencks wrote:
>>> Now that 2.1 is released (I think :-)  I'd like to move toward 
>>> releasing the Roller plugin pretty soon.
>>> The major obstacle I know of is that the source of the roller war 
>>> used as input is rather mysterious and is certainly not released by 
>>> roller.  I can build it locally but I've forgotten what roller 
>>> modifications if any are in it.
>> You are right about that ;). If you chose the local build strategy, 
>> checking out the roller 4.0 tag and use "ant mvn-install"  (also 
>> before first time build "ant mvn-get") should build and install the 
>> roller artifacs. My impression is that this should produce the same 
>> stuff as is released by the roller teem as mvn-install depends on 
>> "build" and I cant find any other ant release related sections but 
>> maybe the actuall release is done some other way (?). No extra 
>> patches should be needed every necessary patch we provided and wanted 
>> to get in for the plugin to work smoothly has been included by the 
>> roller teem before the svn branching to 4.1.
>>> I'm not exactly happy with the idea but think the most practical 
>>> solution is to check any necessary roller patch and the built war 
>>> into svn.  I don't know if we could convince the roller project to 
>>> release maven-compatible artifacts in a reasonable amount of time.
>> There is a "mvn-deploy" section in the roller projects ant build.xml 
>> file but I don't know if anybody has pulled the trigger ;) but 
>> releasing artifacts may not be that far away. But as you say a more 
>> practical solution is probably to add the war by setting up a extra 
>> "roller-war-mvn-install" section in the roller plugin code base that 
>> puts the war in your local maven repos.
>>> Another possible improvement is to remove the jars from WEB-INF/lib 
>>> and put them into our repository.  This would greatly reduce the 
>>> size of the war we'd have to keep in svn.
>> In the long run, if we cant convince the roller teem to pick up maven 
>> which dosen't seem likely, this would be something to consider 
>> although during my work on a maven build system for roller I found 
>> that 4 of the roller used lib jars is not present in maven, but that 
>> may have changed. One way to accomplish this would be to pick up and 
>> maintain the maven build patch for roller but maybe that would be to 
>> "go over the river for water".
> It might be worth it :-).... after spending some time working on a 
> roller security refactoring I remember so many of the reasons I don't 
> like ant :-)
> I've confirmed that we don't need additional roller patches with the 
> current plugin to get something installable.
> I've also played around with a "no-libs" roller without anything in 
> its WEB-INF/lib, all these jars being dependencies in the geronimo 
> repo.  See the GERONIMO-2994-nolibs.patch and 
> GERONIMO-2994-roller-patch patches.  These seem to work fine (only 
> tried jetty so far) but introduce the question of how to make the 4-5 
> unpublished jars and roller jars available to someone who wants to 
> download and install the plugin.  Maybe I can cook up a way to get 
> just these jars into the WEB-INF/lib.  One of the jars, 
> commons-id-1.0-SNAPSHOT has never been released in any form 
> whatsoever, so I kinda wonder about including it in any apache projects.
Great! I hope to get some time this weekend to do some testing on the 
patches. Taking a quick peek at the nolibs patch I notice it uses G:s 
openjpa and I have a faint memory of there being a issue that prevents 
roller from using anything jpa newer than 0.9.7 or .8 so there may be 
some problem lurking inside  ;-).  On the none maven jars topic, 
commons-id at least the project has some sporadic activity see What surprise me a bit is that, 
although widely used, none of the rome jars is found in a public maven 
repo, although the rome stuff is clearly built with maven see
> Another idea I had before releasing this is to try to get logging 
> working.  So far everything I've tried has not allowed any logging 
> from roller in any form I can find.  Anyone have any ideas?
Have you looked in jetty's log? I don't know way I haven't mentioned 
this but at least logging is somehow working using roller on tomcat but 
roller seem to hijack parts of the logging and place it in 
catalina/logs/roller.log. Looks like this

INFO  2008-02-20 19:38:20,977 GeronimoLog:info - SUCCESS: Got parameters. Using configuration
INFO  2008-02-20 19:38:20,979 GeronimoLog:info - -- Using JNDI datasource name: java:comp/env/jdbc/rollerdb
INFO  2008-02-20 19:38:20,981 GeronimoLog:info - SUCCESS: located JNDI DataSource [java:comp/env/jdbc/rollerdb]
WARN  2008-02-20 19:38:23,336 GeronimoLog:warn - Failed to setup mail provider, continuing

>>> Does anyone else want improvements before we release?
>> If the "how to build" section in the readme file is not enough I 
>> would vote for including the war "as is" in a "install war section" 
>> in the plugin code base before release to "ensure" everybody building 
>> the plugin uses the same roller war.
>> There is a roller v4.0.1 on its way I haven't looked at it but maybe 
>> we should upgrade to it as it is likely it is a bug fix release.
> I've seen talk of 4.1 which has some enhancements but not a 4.0.1.... 
> will have to look harder.
Dave is talking about a 4.0.1 snapshot in the "4.0.1 snapshot and 4.1-m1 
builds available for testing" - thread see

and I got the impression it will eventually be a 4.0.1 "bugfix" release.

  peter petersson
> thanks
> david jencks
>> regards
>>   Peter Petersson
>>> thanks
>>> david jencks

View raw message