geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Donald Woods <dwo...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Time to upgrade or drop Minimal assemblies from 3.0 builds?
Date Thu, 10 Jun 2010 17:44:01 GMT


On 6/10/10 11:22 AM, Kevan Miller wrote:
> 
> On Jun 9, 2010, at 7:48 PM, Donald Woods wrote:
> 
>> Now that I have the initial web profile assemblies created and hooked
>> into our TCK harness, I'd like to circle back around on this.
>>
>> Personally, I like Option #1 - Upgrade and rename minimal assemblies to
>> EBA based assemblies.  This way, all of the assemblies we build and
>> release will support the Aries EBA programming model.  Users can choose
>> to build their own custom assemblies if they choose and leave out the
>> EBA and WAB support if they do not require it.  Also, it looks like we
>> will have to add a few more modules into the web profile assemblies to
>> handle some of the TCK tests, along with missing console, monitoring
>> agent, clustering, .... which will probably make those assemblies grow
>> from the current 65MB to more like 80MB.
> 
> The last time I checked (over a month ago), I seem to recall that an EBA assembly was
pulling in components that I didn't think belonged in an EBA assembly (e.g. ActiveMQ). Was
that fixed/changed? 

No ActiveMQ in the current EBA assembly.

On that note, I recall the OSGi EEG is looking at adding Message Driven
Services. So, "EBA" is going to be a moving target overtime... And may
not always be a "minimal" environment.
> 

Well, that could become a problem for our Web profile assembly which
includes EBA, as the TCK docs mention that if a web profile server
includes additional/optional Java EE technologies (aka. JMS or web
services from the Full profile) then the corresponding TCK buckets or
stand-alone tests must also be run.


> I can imagine users being interested in WAB, EBA, Java EE Web, and Java EE Full functionality.
I'm not sure that a multitude of assemblies is where we want to end up, however. I'm sure
we don't want to be building 8 separate assemblies. 
> 

True, but you still end up with a download that includes everything,
including the admin console.  Still think we need a "smaller" download
option for 3.0 that doesn't include the console....


> I've mentioned this before, but I would like to consider packaging multiple configs (or
allowing an assembly to easily run a subset of the installed functionality). Something like:
> 
> geronimo run -c wab-config.xml
> geronimo run -c eba-config.xml
> etc.
> 
> --kevan

Mime
View raw message