geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joe Bohn <joe.b...@earthlink.net>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Geronimo 2.1 samples
Date Thu, 13 Mar 2008 18:47:40 GMT
Joe Bohn wrote:
> David Jencks wrote:
>>
>> On Mar 12, 2008, at 7:12 AM, Joe Bohn wrote:
>>
>>> Donald Woods wrote:
>>>> Joe Bohn wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> 2) When to release the samples?  I think we should make an effort 
>>>>> to release the samples concurrent with each Geronimo release.  This 
>>>>> is important because the jsp & servlet examples are referenced from

>>>>> within the welcome page on Geronimo.  I suppose we could remove 
>>>>> that reference and eliminate the need to release concurrently.
>>>> why not move the samples back under geronimo/server, so they are 
>>>> maintained and versioned with each release and can then be used as 
>>>> additional testsuite tests?  If not, releasing right after a server 
>>>> release is fine.
>>>
>>> I was thinking about doing this.  It seems everybody thinks we should 
>>> release them together anyway so what is the real value with them 
>>> being split out?  Does anybody object to moving them back with the 
>>> server?
>>
>> well, since I thought our next goal with the server build was to 
>> separate it into independently released plugins, I think putting the 
>> samples in with the main server build would be a big step backwards.
> 
> Well, I agree that it would appear to be a step backwards from that 
> perspective.  However, it would ensure the following:
> 
> 1) The samples would get released (not forgotten as has been the case 
> with 2.1)
> 2) The samples would be released concurrent with the Geronimo release so 
> that they are available for use, education, and documentation from day 
> 1.  It seems almost everybody is in favor of this.
> 3) They could be leveraged in the testsuite tests (as Donald pointed 
> out) to help validate our build and find problems earlier.
> 
> I fail to see too many negatives from a practical perspective but I'm 
> certainly open to discussion .... I want to do what is best.
> 
> Perhaps we need to refine our plugin strategy.  There are situations 
> where it makes sense to split things apart but there are also situations 
> where it might make sense to bundle things.
> 
> Joe
> 

Would those folks that feel strongly about not pulling these samples 
back into the server repo please provide some rationale for their 
argument as I have done for including them?  It appears that the samples 
were removed without much thought given to how they might eventually be 
released in conjunction with a server release.  I like the idea of 
modularity but in this case I don't see clear benefits to keeping them 
separate.

Please keep in mind that including the samples in the server source 
branch and releasing them concurrent with the server does not mean that 
they are bundled with the server.  They are still independent artifacts. 
  However, it would ensure that they are vetted with the server release 
and are available when the server release is available.  The samples are 
really only there to show value on top of a Geronimo server and they are 
tied to a specific server release (at least that is how we have managed 
and documented them thus far) so having released independent of the 
server doesn't appear to bring any value.

I looked back through a number of old email threads and these samples 
were included in the welcome page with a lot of support at the time 
(with a desire to have even more samples included or downloadable from 
the welcome page) ... several folks stating that they should be included 
with the server image itself.  I certainly don't want to bundle the 
samples with the server image but having the released with the server 
makes sense to me.

Joe



Mime
View raw message