geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joe Bohn <joe.b...@earthlink.net>
Subject Re: Improve geronimo samples use experience
Date Mon, 13 Oct 2008 14:51:45 GMT

I too agree that a new user should not need to deal with plugins 
initially unless they really want to.

I think they can already do this today ... but perhaps not as cleanly as 
we would like (and not without the user seeing the word "plugin").

The important thing (as David mentioned) is that they need to build the 
samples first.  I don't think that is an unreasonable request.  In fact, 
until our recent release of samples, a user had no choice but to build 
the samples locally as there were no published artifacts.

Once a user has built samples they can do the following if they don't 
want to leverage the plugins:
- Install any necessary prereqs (such as the sample-datasource).  There 
are a number of ways to do this for the datasource (if necessary) .... 
documented in the wiki.  The easiest is to install the plugin but a user 
doesn't have to go that route. See 
http://cwiki.apache.org/GMOxDOC21/sample-applications.html
- Install the specific sample artifact built locally using the archive 
and the appropriate plan from the 
<sample>-tomcat/target/resources/META-INF/plan.xml (or jetty equivalent).

It's a little difficult to get the plan from that location (esp since 
the user must choose the correct plan for the server image they want to 
use) but I'm not convinced it is any worse than having to pull it from a 
maven repo.

It would be ideal if we could:
- Produce a single plan in the build that could work with either tomcat 
or jetty to accompany the ear/war
- Put that plan in a more "user friendly" location (but somewhere under 
target rather than src).
- If we do anything more, we must keep the content from polluting the 
src tree.  Part of the work necessary to get samples to a state where 
they could be released was to remove the special build processing that 
ended up adding various items into the src tree which caused problems 
for the maven release process.

Joe



David Jencks wrote:
> 
> On Oct 12, 2008, at 9:47 PM, Forrest_Xia wrote:
> 
>>
>> Generating standalone and deployment-ready war or ear ball will make 
>> geronimo
>> samples more easier for first try, and will improve user's use 
>> experience.
>>
>> For currently generated war or ear of samples 2.1.2 release, user should
>> supply an external deployment plan.xml to make it deployable. I think it
>> will lead user bad use experience when first trying a simple sample 
>> war or
>> ear ball.
>>
>> Of course, I believe geronimo plugin is a good stuff to try those 
>> samples,
>> but it takes time for user to build up geronimo plugin knowledge.
>>
>> For an experienced JEE developer, he/she is used to consider a .ear or 
>> .war
>> ball is a ready-to-deploy artifact. Suppose that, If they finally find 
>> they
>> need to learn more about geronimo in order to make a simple sample's 
>> .ear or
>> .war deployed succussfully, what feeling will they have?
>>
>> I think well considering user's use habit and ensuring first-try success
>> experience is very important to attract new user to stay with our JEE 
>> server
>> and consequently work with it.
>>
>> So I would suggest we add back geronimo specific deployment plan into
>> packaged war or ear balls. What do you think of this?
> 
> Well, the _only_ javaee compliant location for a plan that I know of is 
> _outside_ the javaee artifact... see jsr88.  Any time you include a plan 
> inside a javaee artifact you are using a proprietary extension.
> 
> I'm not familiar with what other container recommend, are you?
> 
> Most of the samples do need a plan to indicate at least the dependency 
> on the samples datasource.  I'm not really convinced that hiding this 
> plan inside the javaee artifact will make it clear to users that the 
> dependency is required.
> 
> I'm not completely opposed to including a plan if we can provide some 
> automated way to make sure it is at least as functional as the related 
> plans in the plugin subprojects.  Do you have any ideas on how to assure 
> this?  Is it worth the extra effort?
> 
> Another possibility might be to publish the completed plans from the 
> plugin subprojects as additional attached artifacts with say classifier 
> "plan".  That way the plans would be available through maven just as the 
> javaee artifacts are.  To me the main problem with deploying the javaee 
> artifacts is that you have to build the plugins anyway to get the 
> completed plan, and making the plans as available as the javaee 
> artifacts might solve this problem.
> 
> thanks
> david jencks
> 
>>
>>
>> Forrest
>> -- 
>> View this message in context: 
>> http://www.nabble.com/Improve-geronimo-samples-use-experience-tp19948784s134p19948784.html

>>
>> Sent from the Apache Geronimo - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
> 
> 


Mime
View raw message