geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Jason Warner" <jaw...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] GEP 2.1 support for v1.1
Date Sat, 29 Mar 2008 12:33:39 GMT
Hi Tim,

Given that we already have a release that supports 1.1, I'd be inclined to
go with #3 as well.  It'd make it a little clunkier to go from 2.0 to
2.1(server), though, from what I understand.  Correct me if I'm wrong,
but the
process for that would be to port your app to 2.0 server, and then upgrade
to 2.1 GEP for porting to 2.1 server?

Thanks,

~Jason Warner

On Sat, Mar 29, 2008 at 2:19 AM, Tim McConnell <tim.mcconne@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi, The JAXB refactoring of the GEP 2.1.x code is almost complete for the
> 2.0.x
> and 2.1.x versions of the Geronimo servers. Most major functions are now
> working
> and we are much better positioned to handle future schema changes in a
> more
> timely manner. Traditionally, the GEP has supported 3 to 4 versions of the
> Geronimo server (primarily to provide a migration/upgrade path), and we
> had
> originally planned on supporting v1.1, v2.0.x, v2.1.x. However, since we
> are
> almost 2 months behind the release of the v2.1 Geronimo server I would
> like to
> discuss some possible alternatives for supporting the v1.1 Geronimo server
> in
> this release of the GEP:
>
> #1. Proceed with the JAXB refactoring work for the v1.1 code (obviously
> the most
> expensive in terms of time and testing required)
>
> #2. Leave the v1.1 support in the current EMF implementation (i.e., the
> JAXB and
> EMF implementations would co-exist)
>
> #3. Remove support altogether for v1.1 in this release of the GEP --
> support
> only the v2.0 and v2.1 Geronimo servers (the least expensive in terms of
> time
> and testing required)
>
> I'm now of the opinion that we should pursue alternative #3 and remove
> v1.1
> support entirely. My primary rationale is that the the old 2.0 release of
> the
> GEP can still be used to provide v1.1 server support, and still provides a
> migration path from v1.1 to v2.0. It's true that we would lose the v1.1 to
> v2.1
> migration path, but this is mitigated somewhat since the support in the
> GEP for
> the v2.0 and v2.1 versions of the server is almost identical. Equally
> important
> is that we could then focus entirely on fixing the few remaining JIRAs and
> augmenting our JUnit testcases, and release the GEP 2.1 quicker (i.e., in
> the
> next week or 10 days). Thoughts ??
>
> --
> Thanks,
> Tim McConnell
>



-- 
~Jason Warner

Mime
View raw message