geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Donald Woods <dwo...@apache.org>
Subject Re: making plugins (plugins portlet) more visible in the console
Date Fri, 27 Jun 2008 19:24:58 GMT
Yep, maybe we need to move the samples back into the server tree (but 
under their own /samples subdir) for 2.2.  That would also allow us to 
create a samples-testsuite to verify they work... :-)


-Donald


Joe Bohn wrote:
> Donald Woods wrote:
>> OK, guess I selected a bad plugin to install from the list and assumed 
>> that they were all bad....
>>
>> I downloaded and installed a clean 
>> geronimo-tomcat6-javaee5-2.1.1-bin.tar.gz
>>
>> Manually added the 2.1.1 plugin repo - 
>> http://geronimo.apache.org/plugins/geronimo-2.1.1/
>>
>> Selected the "Geronimo Plugins :: Monitoring Agent (JMX)" and it 
>> installed fine.
>>
>> If you select the "Geronimo Configs :: Servlet Examples for Tomcat 
>> 2.1-SNAPSHOT - Example" which shows up in the list, it will FAIL with 
>> - "A problem has occured:
>> org.apache.geronimo.kernel.repository.MissingDependencyException: 
>> Plugin is not installable on Geronimo 2.1.1 Missing dependency: 
>> org.apache.geronimo.samples/servlet-examples-tomcat/2.1-SNAPSHOT/car"
>>
>> Guess we need to remove that plugin once we have the Samples updated 
>> and released for 2.1.
> 
> Ahh ... I think that when I was updating the catalog for 2.1.1 I left 
> the LDAP Sample Realm, LDAP Sample, JSP Example, and Servlet Example in 
> there because of the references from the welcome page.  Since they can 
> not be installed even with the entries I think we should just go ahead 
> and remove them completely from the 2.1.1 catalog.  This won't prevent 
> people from trying via the welcome page but it will prevent any attempts 
> from the catalog (if they take the time to switch to the 2.1.1 catalog 
> that is).  Is there any reason to keep these samples in the 2.1.1 
> catalog for now that I'm missing?  When/if we get samples deployed that 
> can be installed on 2.1.1 we can add the updated samples back into the 
> catalog.
> 
> This would really be a whole lot more manageable (and correct) if we 
> were to merge the samples back into the server and release them 
> concurrently.  I know several folks disagree but the current separation 
> has not yet been successful.
> 
> Joe
> 
> 
>>
>>
>> -Donald
>>
>>
>>
>> Joe Bohn wrote:
>>> Lin Sun wrote:
>>>> Joe, I ran some test against the 2.1.1 plugin repo 2 weeks ago and I
>>>> could not install the sample plugins I tried - forgot the error/prob
>>>> (think I tried the servlet and jsp samples).
>>>>
>>>> Lin
>>>
>>> There is 1 problem here and a few misunderstandings based upon that 
>>> problem:
>>>
>>> Problem:
>>> - The default for the plugin repo for Geronimo 2.1.1 is actually the 
>>> plugin repo for 2.1.  In order to see the Geronimo 2.1.1 plugin repo 
>>> you must manually add the repository.  See this thread for a 
>>> discussion of this issue: 
>>> http://www.nabble.com/plugin-repository-for-2.1.1-td16990905s134.html
>>>
>>>
>>> The not yet released samples (2.1-SNAPSHOT) are tied to Geronimo 2.1 
>>> and not Geronimo 2.1.1.  This is why I have been interested in 
>>> getting samples released for 2.1 and 2.1.1.  The 2.1-SNAPSHOT samples 
>>> appear in the 2.1 repository but not the 2.1.1 repository.  So, if 
>>> you reference the 2.1.1 repository you will not see the samples 
>>> listed at all and not encounter a problem on the install. Of course, 
>>> that is tricky to do since we show you the wrong repository by 
>>> default in 2.1.1.
>>>
>>> So, I think what happened was that you accessed the 2.1 repository 
>>> from a 2.1.1 server and attempted to install one of the sample 
>>> plugins from there.
>>>
>>> There is one more problem that you or others may hit regarding 
>>> attempts to install samples in 2.1.1 at this time.  The servlet, jsp, 
>>> and ldap samples are referenced directly from default/welcome servlet 
>>> (/) and can optionally be installed from there.  An attempt to 
>>> install them from this location will also fail given that it is 
>>> referencing the same incorrect, default plugin repo for 2.1.
>>>
>>> To summarize ... the 2.1.1 repo is not broken AFAIK (if it is broken 
>>> then we can easily fix it).  What is broken is that 2.1.1 references 
>>> the wrong plugin repo by default.  That problem will be fixed when we 
>>> release 2.1.2.
>>>
>>> Joe
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 9:09 AM, Joe Bohn <joe.bohn@earthlink.net>

>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Donald Woods wrote:
>>>>>> Yeah, but until plugins built on earlier releases (like 2.1) work

>>>>>> on later
>>>>>> maintenance updates (like 2.1.1 and 2.1.2) and we fix the 
>>>>>> currently broken
>>>>>> 2.1.1 plugin repo, I don't think we really want to over-hype this
>>>>>> feature....
>>>>> By "the currently broken 2.1.1 plugin repo" do you just mean the 
>>>>> fact that
>>>>> in G 2.1.1 the console defaults to the 2.1 plugin repo rather than 
>>>>> the 2.1.1
>>>>> plugin repo?  The 2.1.1 plugin repo itself is not broken AFAIK and 
>>>>> should
>>>>> work correctly if you access it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Joe
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -Donald
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jarek Gawor wrote:
>>>>>>> Yeah, that's a good point. But there are some things we could
do
>>>>>>> without the collapsible tree, for example, ensure that the debug

>>>>>>> views
>>>>>>> always show up on the bottom, or combine "Information" and "Java
>>>>>>> System Info" into one portlet.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Anyway, I proposed this change becuase I feel like we should
make
>>>>>>> plugins and plugins infrastructure much more visible. Not only
in 
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> console but everywhere else such as the website, documentation,
etc.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Jarek
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 4:54 PM, Donald Woods <dwoods@apache.org>

>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> I'd rather keep Plugins under applications.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> As Joe pointed out, the navigational tree is already taking
up 
>>>>>>>> too much
>>>>>>>> vertical space now for lower resolution displays.  Maybe
if we 
>>>>>>>> ever have
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> collapsible tree again, then we could rearrange/regroup the

>>>>>>>> portlets...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -Donald
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Jarek Gawor wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Hey,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Right now, the plugins portlet is not all that visible
in the 
>>>>>>>>> admin
>>>>>>>>> console (it's under Applications / Plugins). I think
it would 
>>>>>>>>> be great
>>>>>>>>> to make it more visible by creating a new "Plugins" section
with
>>>>>>>>> "Install", "Export", and "Assemble Server" subsections.
I already
>>>>>>>>> created three separate portlets for these plugin operations
so
>>>>>>>>> rearranging things visually should be easy.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Jarek
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
> 
> 

Mime
View raw message