geronimo-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Matt Hogstrom <>
Subject Re: Geronimo's vision
Date Tue, 24 Apr 2007 13:45:39 GMT

On Apr 24, 2007, at 9:22 AM, Bruno Melloni wrote:

> Hello Matt,
> Thanks for your answer.  As to your question, it was bug 3095.  The  
> bug
> may be in the Geronimo plugin code or it may be in the WAS CE  
> derivation
> from such code.  Regardless of where it is, it hampers the ability to
> use Geronimo in Eclipse when another server derived from Geronimo (WAS
> CE in this case) is installed first.
> The response seems to say that this is a "known limitation" of WAS CE,
> not Geronimo, and sounded as coming from a WAS CE team member.  It  
> also
> indicates that "we will not be fixing it in the 1.1 or 2.0  
> releases" (of
> WAS CE I presume) and was closed as "invalid".

I see what you mean.  I think given your comments Donald probably  
could have stated it better but I'll let him address that himself.   
What I think he was indicating was that the bug should not have been  
opened against Geronimo as it was an issue in IBM's distribution of  
CE.  His indicating what CE was planning to do in our JIRA system was  
probably not the right place to address that.  Although, I'm sure the  
person that opened it appreciated the answer, it caused confusion for  
other folks.

It's a good reminder that we need to be screening our JIRA's a bit  
more closely, thanks for the heads up.

> No chance seemed to be given to the Geronimo team to consider the side
> effects or to take preventive measures (i.e.: Adding a clause to the
> Geronimo license requiring that any derived work must not interfere  
> with
> the original).

Perhaps Sachin can comment more on the defect as he did the Eclipse  
tooling in Geronimo.

> bruno
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Matt Hogstrom []
> Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 6:13 PM
> To:
> Subject: Re: Geronimo's vision
> Hi Bruno,
> <-- snip -->
> I was concerned about your comment about "how a bug report was  
> handled"
> comment you mentioned above.  How was it handled that gave you a bad
> feeling?

View raw message