geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Jason Warner" <jaw...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: For which server version(s) should we release samples?
Date Fri, 11 Jul 2008 13:03:40 GMT
My vote goes to option 3 as well for reasons already stated by Jarek.

On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 10:59 PM, Jarek Gawor <jgawor@gmail.com> wrote:

> Option #3. The 2.1 and 2.1.1 users should be upgrading to 2.1.2 anyway
> and I think it's ok to say that samples will not install with 2.1 or
> 2.1.1. And also we don't have too many (if any) people asking for
> these samples to run on 2.1 and 2.1.1.
>
> Jarek
>
> On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 2:47 PM, Joe Bohn <joe.bohn@earthlink.net> 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
> >
>



-- 
~Jason Warner

Mime
View raw message