geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Russell E Glaue <>
Subject Re: Use version suffix for deployment plan file names
Date Thu, 06 Oct 2011 16:28:11 GMT
To make this clear, and allow me to ask a question, let's look at an example
case study, and tell me if this is how it will happen.

A Geronimo User is running G2.2 and want to deploy a G3.0 server side-by-side.
User has a web application with the deployment plan "WEB-INF/geronimo-web.xml"
To be able to deploy to both servers, you are suggesting the User needs a second
deployment plan "WEB-INF/geronimo-web_3.0.0.xml".
After which, during the User's testing of G3.0.0, G3.0.1 is released and the
User upgrades to G3.0.1.

Are you saying the User needs to either rename "WEB-INF/geronimo-web_3.0.0.xml"
to "WEB-INF/geronimo-web_3.0.1.xml", or create a new deployment plan as

That sounds fine to me for small case scenarios like this.

Can I ask just for the sake of asking, assuming we are not removing schema
elements of the deployment plan between maintenance revisions, is it sufficient
to recognize the deployment plan by minor revision instead of by maintenance

So instead of "WEB-INF/geronimo-web_3.0.0.xml" and
"WEB-INF/geronimo-web_3.0.1.xml", the deployment plan file
"WEB-INF/geronimo-web_3.0.xml" would suffice and cover both cases.


On 10/05/2011 07:59 PM, Ivan wrote:
> I think that the number should be consistent with the running Geronimo version,
> and it looks to me this change is kept in the all future versions
> 2011/10/4 Russell E Glaue < <>>
>     This would be a good option to support cross version compatibility.
>     Would the suffix remain the same for minor releases, or would we increment the
>     version number in the suffix (i.e. geronimo-web_3.0.1.xml)?
>     In what future version would this feature be deprecated? Or would we support
>     this methodology in all future versions?
>     -RG
>     On 10/01/2011 02:43 AM, Ivan wrote:
>     > Hi, although we are trying to make the deployment plan compatible among
>     > different versions,there are still differences. e.g. some OSGi metadata are
>     > imported in the latest 3.0 release. So, if the users would hope to use the
>     same
>     > application package for different versions, there may be an issue. I am
>     thinking
>     > that we could use version as suffix for the deployment plans. For the web
>     > application, Geronimo will first try to find a geronimo-web_3.0.0.xml in the
>     > WEB-INF directory, if not it will uses geronimo-web.xml file. With this,
>     it may
>     > get the life easier.
>     > Thoughts ?
>     >
>     > --
>     > Ivan
> -- 
> Ivan

View raw message