geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Hernan Cunico <hcun...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Geronimo 2.1 samples
Date Tue, 11 Mar 2008 19:49:42 GMT
That's pretty much it. We should definitively keep them on svn but we should also make them
available as a zip/tar pretty much the same way we do with the server src. We'd also make
those zip files available from the same apache mirrors we use for the server.

Back to your top 5 list

1) My vote would go with collectively 

2) As soon as we can after releasing the server. Maybe we can shoot for 7 days after the server
is released, just to give a number. On the other hand, once all the samples in svn and version
synced with the server, we could even use these samples for further testing the server (chicken-egg
kinda thing)

3) As long as we provide an alternative to just svn for getting the source I'm fine with removing
the attachments on the wiki and updating the contents accordingly.

4) Agreed, /server and /samples should go along matching branches and tags.

5) Although it would be very cool to have all the samples available from the plugin repo I'm
not exactly in favor of forcing everybody to use plugins. I mean this in the sense that for
sample applications, plugins should only be an optional way for wrapping up an application.
Maybe as part of the build/release process, the same way we generate the zip/tar for the source,
we could also generate the plugin version of such sample app and update the plugin repo all
at the same time. This way, if you want to build the app you can choose from svn or the zip/tar,
if you just want to deploy it you just install the plugin from the repo.

Joe Bohn wrote:
> Joe Bohn wrote:
> 
>> 3) Managing sample source.  IMO the only place we should maintain 
>> source for the samples is in svn.  I think Jarek managed to update all 
>> of the sample doc with references to the svn repo for each sample but 
>> I think there might be a place or two where we include a zip of the 
>> source in the wiki in addition to the SVN reference (at least I recall 
>> seeing some not too long ago).  I plan to hunt them out and remove 
>> those attachments where they are already checked into svn.
> 
> I deleted one reference to a sample source zip file in the wiki 
> (ldap-sample-app) and then thought I should check into this a little 
> more. :-)   I spoke with Hernan and he indicated that we should have the 
> zip files so that a user can download the source without having to 
> install SVN.  I can see the value in this but it is difficult to maintain.
> 
> One option would be to create a zip per sample in the maven build and 
> release them as additional artifacts along with the sample plugins, 
> jars, ears, wars, etc...  We could then reference the mirror locations 
> of these zip files in the wiki pages.
> 
> One other thing ... the zip file for the ldap sample seemed to contain 
> more than just the source - it also included docs, javadoc, even copies 
> of the wiki content.  The jms-mdb-sample has similar contents.  Does 
> anybody know how/why all of this is included in the zip and if it is 
> essential?

In some of the attempts to get the samples standardized we provided some maven archetypes
for creating new samples. These maven projects would include java docs, the "Geronimo theme"
for the web interface if any and a bunch of other things. Not sure if the LDAP sample falls
into this category.

So, I guess many of these inconsistencies will clear up themselves as we standardize where
they live. Ideally I would like to have every single sample app doc available on the wiki
pointing to svn, mirror with zip/tar or plugin repo and vice versa, every sample app we make
available to have a matching doc on the wiki. These by the way would have to be version specific.


Cheers!
Hernan


> 
> Joe
> 
> 

Mime
View raw message