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)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
  s=s1024; d=yahoo.com;
  h=Received:X-YMail-OSG:X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:Mime-Version:In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:Message-Id:Content-Transfer-Encoding:From:Subject:Date:To:X-Mailer;
  b=h2xtPp6vMFWWtE7RrqKLELGRCNri4fFyRSVTznGLGmiFAslExTHmW1o9ZI/CgM3Vl3tpVnLRWpyfEApMGOU0CJk3gcA+05Z4oplsOhlcFG4oNGxfFAYmciqaBygyY531E0On3Gt7AnGs9tGlB4sJT30Kw3bq/8hD+fAyMOWPxfo=
  ;
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v753)
In-Reply-To: <47C71446.1090708@gmail.com>
References: <47C474DF.5010307@gmail.com>
	 <1b5bfeb50802261549ne2c5625x42661c57ad327ddf@mail.gmail.com>
	 <47C70FB6.50008@gmail.com>
 <1b5bfeb50802281156q18d63e9r58ade24603938269@mail.gmail.com>
 <47C71446.1090708@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed
Message-Id: <9AA237CF-2562-4BC7-B25B-5C895C35E664@yahoo.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: David Jencks <david_jencks@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: /lib vs /repository
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2008 12:23:36 -0800
To: dev@geronimo.apache.org


On Feb 28, 2008, at 12:06 PM, Hernan Cunico wrote:

> Jacek Laskowski wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 11:47 AM, Hernan Cunico  
>> <hcunico@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> OK, any reason why we don't follow a similar dir structure as in  
>>> the repo?
>> Good question! Perhaps because it's easier to make a single directory
>> with the minimum files in it and don't bother with the long-ish  
>> paths.
>> Can't see any other reason as simplicity. On the other hand, one  
>> could
>
> but we have
>
> ./lib/
>     + boot/
>     + endorsed/
>     + gshell/
>
> which it is not entirely flat.
> So it would seem to me that either way we could make some changes  
> here to either make it really flat or consistent with the repo.  
> Just a thought, but I think it would help make the things look more  
> clear.

Lets not mess with it without clear understanding of what stuff is  
there and why.  Making it flat would be fairly disasterous as far as  
clarity and function.

Basically until you have a repository implementation available you  
need a classpath.  The stuff that is needed to load the repository  
implementations or needed in the application classloader go in lib/.   
Lots of people have worked hard to reduce the amount of stuff needed  
here but without some major gshell magic we're near the minimum now.

endorsed is a java feature for the yoko specs.  We could calculate  
the locations in the repo and supply them on the ant "command line"  
that gshell sets up but that would effectively remove the  
plausibility of starting the server without gshell.  Moving the jars  
into lib would make all of our startup jars in endorsed which would  
be a really bad idea.

boot and gshell are for gshell.  Jason's working hard to move as much  
of the contents as possible into the repo, but it's not trivial and  
don't rush him.

thanks
david jencks

>
> Cheers!
> Hernan
>
>> argue it's harder to maintain but since we build Geronimo with maven
>> we don't really bother with it as Maven takes care of it. Hope I'm  
>> not
>> mistaken.
>> I see it that you can have the bare framework with the single lib
>> directory. Now, the question is what part of Geronimo introduces the
>> repository dir? If it's something that's not needed for the
>> framework's work you get the picture - you don't need to worry about
>> repository directory as it's outside the framework. The framework  
>> uses
>> lib and others can do whatever they want. If it's not the case, well,
>> we could think of pros and cons moving them to repository then.
>> Jacek