geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Lin Sun" <linsun....@gmail.com>
Subject Re: boilerplate vs. framework as required plugin for custom server assembly
Date Tue, 14 Oct 2008 13:37:46 GMT
Yea I agree.  I think it will be a lot of working to pulling them into
2.1 branch thus I don't intend to do so.

Lin

On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 9:27 AM, Donald Woods <dwoods@apache.org> wrote:
> I believe there are too many c-m-p and plugin/pluginprofile
> changes/additions to warrant adding this into the 2.1 maintenance stream.
>
>
> -Donald
>
>
> Jack Cai wrote:
>>
>> Hi Lin,
>>
>> Can we create the framework plugin group for 2.1.x too if this does not
>> take too much? Thanks in advance!
>>
>> Jack
>>
>> 2008/10/9 Lin Sun <linsun.unc@gmail.com <mailto:linsun.unc@gmail.com>>
>>
>>    Hi,
>>
>>    I have been looking at GERONIMO-4226 today.
>>
>>    For a while, we have been recommending users to pick boilerplate as a
>>    required plugin when assembling a custom server, in order to get a
>>    working server.   However, this working server isn't really working,
>>    as a user won't be able to start the server using gshell (see G4226).
>>
>>    I am proposing to recommend users to pick the framework plugin group
>>    (org.apache.geronimo.plugingroups/framework/2.2-SNAPSHOT/car) as the
>>    required plugin when assembling a custom server, in order to get a
>>    working server.    I don't think this is possible with 2.1.x releases
>>    as the framework plugin group doesn't exist there.   Any issue with
>>    that?  If no, I'll update our code and user docs.
>>
>>    Lin
>>
>>
>

Mime
View raw message