geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Jencks <>
Subject Re: Release Roller plugin soon?
Date Wed, 20 Feb 2008 02:00:19 GMT

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.

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?

>> 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.

david jencks

> regards
>   Peter Petersson
>> thanks
>> david jencks

View raw message