geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Jencks <david_jen...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: Samples - Why are the tomcat/jetty prerequisites not set?
Date Thu, 11 Sep 2008 15:58:09 GMT

On Sep 11, 2008, at 11:39 AM, Donald Woods wrote:

> As a "user" I hate how the Plugin portlet and cmdline show plugins  
> that can't/shouldn't be installed on my Tomcat JEE5 or Minimal  
> server....
>
> Seems that we're confusing/complicating everyone's life for a  
> framework assembly scenario that should be handled in the code:
> - If a plugin lists tomcat or jetty as a depend, but the server has  
> the opposite container installed, then it should not be installable.
> - If a plugin lists tomcat or jetty as a depend, but the server has  
> neither installed, then the plugin is installable.
>
> The same logic would be applied to axis2 and cxf depends.

Thats a capability that IMO cannot be reasonably be pushed onto the  
dependency system, or the "requires" system.  We could push it onto  
the obsoletes system but I doubt people would like it.  As I've said  
repeatedly in the past we need another system to deal with this.

The closest analogy I can think of is separation of duty constraints  
in an rbac system.

I think what we are thinking about is rules like "you can only have  
one of {jetty, tomcat} installed" and "you can only have one of {cxf,  
axis2} installed}.  Note that this may not be a great formulation  
because if we come up with say a resin integration we'd like to have  
the rule on old servers magically update to "you can only have one of  
{jetty, tomcat, resin} installed".  Also note that our existing javaee  
servers don't follow the "you can only have one of {cxf, axis2}  
installed" rule.

The closest to a solution I've thought of is to have a set of rule- 
keys associated with each plugin such as web-container or webservice- 
container and then have rules like "only one web-container".  I think  
this would satisfy the "new implementation" problem illustrated above  
by the hypothetical resin plugin but I don't know what to do about the  
"we want both installed but only one running" problem.  For that  
matter maybe we only want contraints on what will start, not what will  
run.  If we have both cxf and axis installed, why not supply just one  
ee server with both jetty and tomcat installed and use tomcat instead  
of jetty with a command line flag, like we do with cxf/axis2?

Whenever I start thinking about this it rapidly seems like we'd need a  
big logic engine to provide a reasonable solution so I fall back on  
user discretion.  I'm happy to keep discussing it however.

thanks
david jencks

>
>
>
> -Donald
>
>
>
> David Jencks wrote:
>> On Sep 11, 2008, at 11:13 AM, Donald Woods wrote:
>>> OK, it's because of wanting to install on a framework assembly....
>>> Guess we're stuck with this for 2.1, but never liked this  
>>> approach, especially given we are providing Tomcat and Jetty  
>>> versions of each sample and most do truly prereq a web container...
>>>
>>> I disagree with this approach for 2.2 since we'll have plugin  
>>> profiles that users should be using instead of starting with the  
>>> framework assembly.
>> what? why does the existence of the framework profile change the  
>> reasoning?  You need enough of a server to install plugins, then  
>> everything else required for the app is pulled in.  The framework  
>> profile defines this minimal server.  The framework profile just  
>> makes it easier to assemble servers, it doesn't change how to add  
>> stuff to a server.  I don't see any relevance of any of the other  
>> profiles since they are designed to help with assembling servers  
>> with specific capabilities, which is irrelevant to the process of  
>> installing plugins into a frameworks server.
>> not sure how coherent this is but I don't understand what you are  
>> saying at all.
>> thanks
>> david jencks
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -Donald
>>>
>>> Joe Bohn wrote:
>>>> We had this discussion a while ago (along with a lot of other  
>>>> samples issues).  The results were summarized in the wiki status  
>>>> page: http://cwiki.apache.org/GMOxPMGT/geronimo-samples-212-release-work-items.html

>>>>  Here's the thread where it was discussed:
>>>> http://tiny.cc/uVkbL
>>>> Joe
>>>> Donald Woods wrote:
>>>>> Seems that only one of the samples has the tomcat/jetty  
>>>>> prerequisite set.  Why?  Shouldn't we include this setting so  
>>>>> the Plugin portlet will only allow the appropriate samples to be  
>>>>> installed?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -Donald
>>>>>


Mime
View raw message