geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Donald Woods <>
Subject Re: Plugin groups
Date Thu, 11 Sep 2008 02:11:12 GMT
Good point.  I forgot about the more complex scenarios, where we could 
be aggregating plugins from several subdirs, which would mean moving 
them under /plugins wouldn't make sense.  You would have a plugin build 
under Tomcat that would rely upon other plugins being built in peer 
subdirs, which would make trying to rebuild small chunks of the server 
about impossible.


Joe Bohn wrote:
> David Jencks wrote:
>> On Sep 10, 2008, at 10:42 AM, Joe Bohn wrote:
>>> David Jencks wrote:
>>>> I looked at the new plugin groups stuff and have a couple 
>>>> ideas/suggestions.
>>>> I'm going to create a framework plugin group.  Is there some reason 
>>>> this won't work?
>>>> I'd like to see the plugin groups distributed closer to where their 
>>>> components are found, e.g. web-jetty in plugins/jetty.  Does this 
>>>> seem reasonable?
>>> Hmm .. I kinda like having them as another category of things.  I can 
>>> image that there might be groups created in the future that have an 
>>> equal affinity to several components. For example, where would the 
>>> framework plugin group fit?
>> It ought to be in framework, along with boilerplate.  Unfortunately we 
>> can't quite crowbar it in yet.
>> I think putting the groups with the stuff they aggregate fits well 
>> with the long term goal that I thought we were agreed on to put most 
>> of the server plugins into /plugins and release them separately from 
>> the main server (i.e. framework).
> I didn't think the suggestion to keep the plugin-groups independent was 
> in conflict with the separate plugin releases (in fact I thought it 
> further supported it).  Perhaps I don't understand the plugin-groups 
> well enough.
> It was my understanding that the plugin-groups aggregated plugins 
> together and could be arbitrarily complex.  I also thought that the 
> plugin groups would themselves be cars (with dependencies on other cars) 
> that could be released and installed independently (however I just 
> noticed that they are actually jars in the build so maybe I am confused).
> If we distribute them with specific plugins (which are just one of many 
> that are included in the group) then I'm not clear how you would choose 
> which plugin to associate it with.  For example, if you wanted a group 
> that included tomcat, cxf, ejb, and clustering which plugin would get 
> "ownership" of the group?
> I hope I'm not confusing the issue too much.
> Thanks,
> Joe
>> thanks
>> david jencks
>>>> I think the car-maven-plugin can use another packaging style for 
>>>> these plugin groups that will mean we don't have to configure much 
>>>> of anything for the c-m-p.  Maybe we won't need the empty plan either.
>>>> I thought the idea was to use only the plugin groups when assembling 
>>>> our actual servers.  Is this work still in progress?  It looks to me 
>>>> as if we have both a complete list of plugins plus the plugin groups 
>>>> that would also pull them in.
>>>> Are there any jiras for this work?
>>>> thanks
>>>> david jencks

View raw message