geronimo-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mark Aufdencamp <>
Subject RE: [DISCUSS/FEEDBACK] Usability improvements to Geronimo
Date Mon, 05 Nov 2007 15:59:09 GMT
A piece of constructive criticism and feature request.

I only have one major issue with Geronimo.   It involves shutting down
the application server.  As a developer/administrator, I expect the
container to cascade the shutdown to the included components.  This
doesn't occur within the Tomcat GBean environment.

I understand that a service can always crash and the application could
be shutdown without cleanup/exit routines being processed.  However,
when I stop the service on an application server as an administrator, I
expect that the web applications would be stopped as well.  This doesn't
occur.  It would be really nice if the container would shutdown the web
apps so that context listener's "contextDestroyed" method  would be
processed properly when the application server was stopped.

I imagine this involves enhancing the Tomcat GBean to retrieve a
collection of active web apps and then walking through them to stop each
individual web app.  Currently one would need to log into the console
and shutdown each web app before stopping the application server in
order to properly process the Context Listeners.

Truthfully, I haven't tested this in G2, but I know this is how 1.1
functions and havent seen any discussion of the issue.

My 2 cents for the day:)

Mark Aufdencamp

> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: [DISCUSS/FEEDBACK] Usability improvements to Geronimo
> From: "Prasad Kashyap" <>
> Date: Fri, November 02, 2007 11:37 am
> To: "Geronimo Dev" <>,
> As we get close to releasing Geronimo 2.1 and look beyond, I'd like to
> discuss a few usability improvements we can do to G. I am
> cross-posting this to the user-list so that we can get a direct
> feedback from our dear users.
> 1. Dynamic status messages. Some operations may take a certain amount
> of time which could make the administrator uneasy as he waits. On a
> local machine, he has the luxury of tailing the geronimo.log or seeing
> the startup terminal. On a remote machine, he is almost flying blind
> in the absence of any dynamically updating status messages. It would
> be nice if we had another portlet at the bottom that showed status of
> the operation being performed. This is really useful for long running
> operations.
> 2. Geronimo Workbench. With the addition of features like "Plan
> Creator" and "Create Plugin", the Admin Console has slowly begun to
> tread into the domain of tooling. Now we are introducing features for
> monitoring the server. It's debatable whether such features should
> even exist in the console. Purists might want the console to be solely
> for configuration of the server. But given the fact, that they are
> already there, we should consider creating tabs at the top or
> sectional categories in the navigation menu. Since we have a
> navigation tree which does not collapse, we have already crossed a
> point where we have to scroll down to see all the links. This is a
> usability no-no. It's time to transform the Console to a Workbench as
> more Tooling and Monitoring features find their way in.
> 3. Plugin Creator Enhancements: Our current "plugin create" feature in
> the console is limited to exporting an already deployed configuration.
> It does not even include the geronimo-plugin.xml inside the exported
> car. It would be nice to enhance this tool such that any plugin can be
> created based on a set of already existing plugins as dependencies.
> This should allow users to create simple plugins without having to
> learn maven or the car-maven-plugin.
> 4. Enhanced logging framework which can specify logging filters at the
> package level.
> Please feel free to discuss the merits and demerits of these features
> and/or add to the list.
> Cheers
> Prasad.

View raw message