I think the main reason why the new war has the different structure with the old one is: in the pom.xml of ext\trunk\geronimo-dojo-0.4.3, only check out the files in "src" to target/resource checkout generate-resources checkout ${project.basedir}/target/resources scm:svn: http://svn.dojotoolkit.org/src/tags/release-0.4.3/*src/* I just tried "scm:svn:http://svn.dojotoolkit.org/src/tags/release-0.4.3/", and the JMX and LDAP portlet seems working correctly, but the other three still have some problems to show the tree. -Rex 2009/7/16 David Jencks > > On Jul 15, 2009, at 6:27 AM, Rex Wang wrote: > > tried it. > > 1. > svn co > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/external/trunk/geronimo-dojo-0.4.3 > mvn clean install > success! > > 2. > modify the plugins/dojo-legacy stuff > the patch in attachment shows the modification. > build successfully > > 3. > I did not build the entire server, but just remove the old one, and install > the new one. > I believe only the debug-views portlets use this legacy dojo, because when > I stop the dojo-legacy-tomcat plugin, only the debugviews-console-tomcat web > project stopped autoly. and I also searched all the jsps underneath plugins > folder in the server build tree, only show the ones from debugviews holding > reference to "/dojo/0.4/dojo.js" > > results: > Unfortunately, the debugviews portlet don't display corretly... > > I make some screen shot. Shall we open a jira for this so that I can upload > them, which apparently shows dojo not work correctly? > > > Or we could try to fix them :-) > > I looked at the two war files and they are different and I wonder what we > actually use. > > old war (geronimo-dojo-legacy): > -rw-r--r-- 151841 15-May-2007 02:11:02 dojo.js > -rw-r--r-- 326567 15-May-2007 02:11:04 dojo.js.uncompressed.js > -rw-r--r-- 1170 15-May-2007 02:06:02 flash6_gateway.swf > -rw-r--r-- 2364 15-May-2007 02:06:02 iframe_history.html > -rw-r--r-- 11346 15-May-2007 02:06:02 LICENSE > -rw-r--r-- 13133 14-Jul-2009 15:01:02 META-INF/LICENSE > -rw-r--r-- 587 14-Jul-2009 15:01:02 META-INF/NOTICE > -rw-r--r-- 1609 15-May-2007 02:11:32 src/a11y.js > ...... > everything else is under src/ > > new war (geronimo-dojo-0.4.3): > just the contents of src from geronimo-dojo-legacy. > > So what do we actually use here? if its just dojo.js we can shrink it by > leaving out the uncompressed.js and all the little files. If its just the > little files under src we can use the new war and change the references to > leave out the "src/" bit. Maybe I can come up with an alternate profile to > build a war with just dojo.js in it?? > > wishing I understood javascript delivery even a little bit... > david jencks > > > HTH > Rex. > > > 2009/7/15 Rex Wang > >> I'd like to try it :-) >> -Rex >> >> 2009/7/15 David Jencks >> >> Jay -- many thanks for trying out the patch and committing it. >>> >>> I think the last artifact in our svn repo is the dojo 0.4.3. I can't >>> find it released anywhere but the source code is in a handy svn repo. I >>> cooked up a modification of our war-packaging for it that uses the maven scm >>> plugin to check out the source so it can be packaged easily. I wonder if >>> someone could try this out and see if it works? >>> >>> -- check out new war project and build it >>> svn co >>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/external/trunk/geronimo-dojo-0.4.3 >>> cd geronimo-dojo-0.4.3 >>> mvn clean install >>> >>> -- modify the plugins/dojo-legacy stuff so that >>> geronimo-dojo-legacy is not built >>> the dojo-legacy-jetty and dojo-legacy-tomcat plugins use the >>> geronimo-dojo-0.4.3-1.0-SNAPSHOT war file instead of the >>> geronimo-dojo-legacy war. >>> >>> -- build the server and see if the parts that use the legacy dojo still >>> work (debug views??? I'm not sure) >>> >>> many thanks >>> david jencks >>> >>> >>> >>> On Jul 10, 2009, at 6:58 AM, Kevan Miller wrote: >>> >>> >>>> On Jul 9, 2009, at 5:59 PM, David Jencks wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> On Jul 9, 2009, at 2:44 PM, Jay D. McHugh wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hey David, >>>>>> >>>>>> I'm starting to take a look at it today. >>>>>> >>>>>> They have a 1.3.1 version out - any objections to me switching the >>>>>> patch >>>>>> to use it? >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Not at all -- I just thought I'd start small since usually I change 18 >>>>> things at once and then can't tell what change broke what feature :-) >>>>> >>>>> I think kevan mentioned offline he might take a look also. I think >>>>> I've been running locally with this patch for a couple weeks and haven't >>>>> seen any admin console problems, but that doesn't mean much one way or >>>>> another. >>>>> >>>> >>>> I built with the patch and ran testsuite on Jetty. Everything looked >>>> good to me (except for a corba-testsuite test that hung). >>>> >>>> Jay, >>>> If you can test with the latest Dojo version and things look good to >>>> you, I'd say go ahead and apply the updates. >>>> >>>> --kevan >>>> >>> >> > > > >