geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Shiva Kumar H R" <shiv...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: For which server version(s) should we release samples?
Date Sat, 12 Jul 2008 17:02:36 GMT
My vote would also go to option 3 (makes life easy).

On Sat, Jul 12, 2008 at 3:16 AM, Joe Bohn <joe.bohn@earthlink.net> wrote:

>
> Going once ... going twice ....
>
> Anybody that thinks we need to release samples for 2.1 and/or 2.1.1 should
> speak up soon.  So far the consensus is a 2.1.2 release only.
>
> Thanks to those that responded.
>
> Joe
>
>
>
> Joe Bohn wrote:
>
>> We've been going back and forth on samples now for some time.  There are
>> multiple reasons why the samples are not yet released -- but one of them has
>> to do with compatibility for the 2.1.x releases.
>>
>> Up until now I've been assuming that we would release samples for 2.1 for
>> the sake of completeness and ensure that we can get those same samples
>> working on 2.1.1 and 2.1.2+.  If it wasn't possible to get the same samples
>> working on higher releases then I figured we would release 2.1.1 and 2.1.2+
>> versions of the samples.  Now, I'm starting to wonder if it is worth the
>> effort to release samples for anything other than 2.1.2.
>>
>> Here are the facts:
>> - We can add artifact-alias entries to get 2.1 samples working on a 2.1.2
>> server or even a 2.2 server.
>> - A fix was required for the alias processing which was not included in
>> 2.1.1.  Therefore, if we release samples for 2.1 we will not be able to
>> run them on 2.1.1 - but we could run them on 2.1.2 (when released). That
>> seems like a strange scenario - 2.1 ok, 2.1.2 no, 2.1.2 ok.  If we release
>> 2.1.1 samples in addition to 2.1 then which of those do we point users to
>> leverage on 2.1.2?  IMO it would be clearer to say we support 2.1.2+.
>> - Is there a strong need for samples on older releases or are they
>> primarily of value on the latest release?  As Lin pointed out to me, users
>> looking at samples will most likely be working with our latest release.  If
>> we release samples for 2.1/2.1.1 will anybody actually use them (assuming we
>> release 2.1.2 and follow that up quickly with the samples for 2.1.2)?
>>
>> So these are the obvious choices:
>> 1) Release samples for 2.1.  Release another version of samples for
>> 2.1.1.  Then either release samples for 2.1.2 or include alias entries in
>> the 2.1.2 server so that the 2.1/2.1.1 samples will work on 2.1.2.
>> OR
>> 2) Release samples for 2.1.  Skip 2.1.1.  Add artifact aliases to support
>> the 2.1 samples on 2.1.2 and document that we don't support samples on
>> 2.1.1.
>> OR
>> 3) Release samples for 2.1.2 and then address any future 2.1.x releases
>> with artifact aliases.  Point users that want to leverage samples to do so
>> on 2.1.2+ and document that we don't support samples on 2.1 or 2.1.1.
>>
>> There are a few potential issues with option #3:
>> - The ldap sample requires directory server to be installed on G or the
>> use of an external LDAP server.  The recommended approach for the installed
>> directory server is to install the Directory plugin.  However, this plugin
>> is currently only released for a G 2.1 server.  We would need to either
>> release a new version of the Directory plugin or do the compatibility trick
>> with aliases again for 2.1.2.
>> - The 2.1 & 2.1.1 welcome page references to the jsp, servlet, and
>> ldap-sample examples will never work.  Actually, they won't work even if we
>> release 2.1 & 2.1.1 samples unless we want to change the groupid/module
>> names of these samples back to the original names prior to a release of them
>> (which I doubt we would want to do).
>>
>> Any other issues, recommendations, or thoughts?
>>
>> Joe
>>
>>
>


-- 
Thanks,
Shiva

Mime
View raw message