I agree and I never used it either.  I would rather load the source as
the link below described, start geronimo using geronimo jpda run and
debug it as a remote app.

Lin

On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 3:21 PM, Ted Kirby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If I were going to debug Geronimo with eclipse, I would check out the
> source code and use that.  In fact, isn't that what we tell users at
> http://cwiki.apache.org/GMOxDEV/developing-geronimo-in-eclipse.html ?
> I wouldn't use a zip of the geronimo source.  Again, do we need to
> support this function?  I think this is a very rare and not too useful
> case.  It is an extra screen that most users would not be interested
> in, and only adds confusion.
>
> Ted
>
> On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 10:34 AM, Tim McConnell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Yes it is for debugging the Geronimo source code. I haven't used it in some
>> time, but I "think" that it used to work. I'll try it again just to verify
>> since it's been so long....... If I get it to work, I'll update the
>> documentation accordingly.....
>>
>>
>> Jack Cai wrote:
>>>
>>> Is it for debugging purpose? So that people can step in Geronimo source
>>> code... My guess.
>>>
>>> -Jack
>>>
>>> 2008/8/21 Ted Kirby <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>>
>>>
>>>    Now that you mention it...  I have never done anything with this
>>>    screen.  I am not even sure what it is for.  Can we remove this screen
>>>    from the define server dialog?
>>>
>>>    Ted
>>>
>>>    On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 5:53 PM, Jacek Laskowski
>>>    <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
>>>     > Hi,
>>>     >
>>>     > I wonder what I should point the Geronimo Source Archive field when
>>> I
>>>     > have the Geronimo sources checked? What about people without the
>>>     > sources locally? What value(s) do people use for the field? Is it
>>>     > described somewhere?
>>>     >
>>>     > Jacek
>>>     >
>>>     > --
>>>     > Jacek Laskowski
>>>     > Notatnik Projektanta Java EE - http://www.JacekLaskowski.pl
>>>     >
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Thanks,
>> Tim McConnell
>>
>

Reply via email to