Yes they are all in the current web profile assembly with no plan to remove them.
Thanks, Lin On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 4:19 PM, Donald Woods <dwo...@apache.org> wrote: > We need connector, TranQL and RAs for OpenJPA.... > > -Donald > > > On 8/20/10 2:29 PM, Lin Sun wrote: >> Ok, regarding tranql RAs, the derby ones are pulled in by >> system-database. The other RAs are pulled in as part of the >> db-connectors plugin which is part of the eba-tomcat plugin group. >> >> I think we are fine to keep these RAs in, if we want to support these >> different dbs like db2, oracle, sql server, etc in our web profile >> assembly. >> >> Lin >>> 2. tranql: i cannot think of a reason why these resource adapters are >>> needed for web profile... I can see geronimo-connector are needed but >>> not the RAs. Maybe people who knows more about tranql could comment >>> on this? >>> >>> Anything else I missed on this topic? >>> >>> Thanks >>> >>> Lin >>> >>> On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 11:30 AM, Jarek Gawor <jga...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 10:09 AM, Lin Sun <linsun....@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> Hi >>>>> >>>>> I am checking at our web profile assemblies to ensure it met the >>>>> requirements for Java EE 6 web profile and prune the unnecessary >>>>> artifacts. I've been mainly look at the tomcat7-javaee6-web and I >>>>> have some comments/questions: >>>>> >>>>> felix core: i assume we'll always ship 2 osgi runtime? >>>> >>>> Yep, that's the plan. >>>> >>>>> connector (geronimo-connector, geronimo-connector-builder, connector >>>>> spec): I think openejb uses connector, so we may have to keep it in. >>>>> >>>>> java ee management 1.1: Unchanged from Java EE 5. I assume this is >>>>> provided by geronimo-management. Not sure if we could remove this? >>>>> >>>>> java ee deployment 1.2 related: Unchanged from Java EE 5. we may >>>>> have to keep it in, to keep existing deployment work. >>>>> >>>>> geronimo-javamail: can we get rid of it? think the answer is yes. >>>> >>>> Maybe. Might be nicer to include it. >>>> >>>>> geronimo-jaspi: can we get rid of it? think the answer is yes. >>>> >>>> Maybe. Might be nicer to include it. >>>> >>>>> geronimo-webservices, geronimo-webservices-builder: think we could >>>>> remove these. >>>> >>>> Yes, i think so. >>>> >>>>> geronimo-yoko, yoko: think we could remove these. >>>>> >>>>> spec jars: we seems to include all specs in web profile assembly. >>>>> things that can be removed: aspic, jaxr, jaxrpc, jaxws, dims, saaj, >>>>> ccpp? >>>> >>>> I don't think this is very important. A lot of specs have dependencies >>>> on each other. So this might be a mess to sort it all out. I think we >>>> should be able to include them all even though we don't provide all of >>>> that functionality. At runtime an user should see an error that a >>>> given provider is not found. >>>> >>>>> >>>>> mina: think we could remove it... not sure which web profile function >>>>> it related to. >>>> >>>> It's not related to web profile. It used so one can remotely login to >>>> Karaf/Geronimo shell. So this should be totally ok. >>>> >>>>> ops4j, pax-loggin-api, pax-url-mvn, pax-url-wrap: think these are just >>>>> test dependencies that were put into the assembly incorrectly. >>>> >>>> Again, not related to web profile. And these are used at runtime. We >>>> need them. Expect maybe pax-url-wrap. >>>> >>>>> tranql: think we could remove it. >>>>> >>>>> openejb: anything we could do so that we can just have the ejb-lite >>>>> function? >>>>> >>>>> pluto/portal: I assume these are needed for admin console so we need it. >>>> >>>> Right. Shouldn't matter for web profile. >>>> >>>> Jarek >>>> >>> >> >
