subject:"\"User Feedback Request \\\-\\\- this means you\\\!\""

Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!

2006-04-06 Thread Matt Hogstrom


Well, the *b* key is at least located next to the *n* key :)  My bad.

David Blevins wrote:


On Apr 5, 2006, at 3:13 PM, Matt Hogstrom wrote:

Good points Tony, thanks.  We are delinquent in the crusty bug  
situation.  We'll see if we can sort that out as we get through 1.1.



Who's Tony ;-P

Regardless, great feedback Toby.  And as Matt says sorry about the  lack 
of bug uptake


I whipped together this report which will now be sent to the dev list  
on the 1st and 15th of every month.  I hope it will help the  absorbency 
of JIRA items by both developers and people looking to  contribute.


Cool thing about sending them to the dev list is that they'll get  
archived and we can be embarrassed by our inaction for years to come :)


You weren't kidding about some of them being old, you've got one in  
there from Aug 05, 2004 !!!


-David

On Apr 6, 2006, at 3:53 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


 Unassigned issues (273) as of 2006-04-06
 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

 1 WEEK (8 issues)

 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

  Key   
SummaryReporter   Created
 GERONIMO-1800 SPECjAppServer2004 Deployment  
Descriptors   Vasily Zakharov Apr 03, 2006
 GERONIMO-1804 The name of JNDI/RMI service provider is hardcoded  in 
the sources.  Andrey Pavlenko Apr 05, 2006
 GERONIMO-1805 org.apache.geronimo.directory.RunningTest hangs on  BEA 
Jrockit VMs  Alexei Zakharov Apr 05, 2006
 GERONIMO-1815 Remove empty config-store  
directory Dain Sundstrom  Apr  06, 
2006
 GERONIMO-1792 Ant Tasks Mirror of Maven  
Plugins   Heinie Barnard  Mar  30, 
2006
 GERONIMO-1801 Restart/Shutdown functionality for Geronimo when  using 
Java Service Mario Ruebsam   Apr 04, 2006

   Wrapper
 GERONIMO-1812 When already deployed application is hot deployed  once 
gain , ServerMansoor Apr 06, 2006

   doesn't delete the module from hot deployed directory
 GERONIMO-1813 When already deployed application is hot deployed  once 
gain , ServerMansoor Apr 06, 2006

   doesn't delete the module from hot deployed directory

 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

 30 DAYS (37 issues)

 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

  Key
SummaryReporter  Created
 GERONIMO-1733 Module migration to Maven 2:  
mail Jacek Laskowski   Mar 09,  2006
 GERONIMO-1734 Module migration to Maven 2: naming- 
builder   Jacek Laskowski   Mar 09, 2006
 GERONIMO-1735 Module migration to Maven 2:  
transaction  Jacek Laskowski   Mar 09,  2006
 GERONIMO-1736 Module migration to Maven 2: web- 
builder  Jacek Laskowski   Mar 09, 2006
 GERONIMO-1739 Plugin migration to Maven 2: geronimo-izpack- 
plugin   Jacek Laskowski   Mar 09, 2006
 GERONIMO-1747 HTTP-methods  
checks   Ilya  
Platonov Mar 16, 2006
 GERONIMO-1749 Server Logs portlet - Web Access Log Viewer  
improvements  Vamsavardhana Reddy   Mar 17, 2006
 GERONIMO-1726 Module migration to Maven 2:  
common   Jacek Laskowski   Mar 09,  2006
 GERONIMO-1727 Module migration to Maven2:  
connector Jacek Laskowski   Mar 09,  2006
 GERONIMO-1752 JMS Server portlet - Edits to JMS Network Listener  are 
lost upon  Vamsavardhana Reddy   Mar 20, 2006

   server restart
 GERONIMO-1751 Deployment of ear with external plan using "Deploy  
New" console   John Sisson   Mar 20, 2006

   option caused FileNotFoundException
 GERONIMO-1756 Move from 1.1-dev version of commons-fileupload to  
version 1.1John Sisson   Mar 20, 2006
 GERONIMO-1758 Can not use Realm with SQL database over connection  
pool  Torsten Markwardt Mar 21, 2006
 GERONIMO-1761 Change geronimo-util module to geronimo-crypto, give  
credit where Aaron Mulder  Mar 22, 2006

   credit is due
 GERONIMO-1762 Create a derby network /embedded XA datasource via  
admin console  Lin Sun   Mar 23, 2006

   fail
 GERONIMO-1763 default config.xml does not list Jetty AJP  
connector  Aaron Mulder  Mar 23, 2006
 GERONIMO-1786 JMS Listeners for protocols activeio, peer and  
openwire fail to   Donald Woods  Mar 28, 2006

   start
 GERONIMO-1789 Exceptions while adding SQL Realm thru Admin  
Console  Vamsavardhana Reddy   Mar 29, 2006
 GERONIMO-1746 Updates to Logger through Log Manager portlet under  
Console are   Vamsavardhana Reddy   Mar 16, 2006

   not reflected i

Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!

2006-04-06 Thread John Sisson


Sachin Patel wrote:
Yes we should have both but I'm not sure if I agree with your second 
statement. :) I think JIRA should be the first place users should go 
to request a feature.  The wiki will never encapsulate all the work 
that needs to be done for a project.  JIRA tells us this.  Thus the 
wiki should be used to bundle the wish-list and associate them to the 
themes and priorities for a release.  I think trying to keep jiras and 
the wiki synchronized is invaluable and is unnecessary work.  The wiki 
should be the place where to look for what is planned for that 
release, and the discussions around and links to jiras/threads for 
those items. So the first step I think should be to open jira's and 
from there these can be sorted and prioritized and pushed up into the 
wiki, I don't think it should be the other way around.  There is alot 
of things that need to be cleaned up in current in JIRA and by using 
it as the first place for work items this forces us to maintain and 
constantly scub JIRA to provide an accurate indication of project status.


thats by 2 cents :)
+1 - I always look in the JIRA records for a project (to get a picture 
of its stability and priorities) before adopting it.  JIRA is a great 
tool for prioritising and keeping track of work, lets not duplicate this 
in the Wiki.


John



- sachin



On Apr 5, 2006, at 6:12 PM, Matt Hogstrom wrote:

I think you need both.  The Wiki is a place to look at what there is 
to do...JIRA is the way to tell people your doing it.


Dave Colasurdo wrote:
Wasn't suggesting the wiki as the final resting spot, just a 
temporary holding spot while the user requirements were being 
gathered, tallied, discussed and prioritized by the community.  It 
works better than email threads passing in the night.  No objection 
to moving the output to JIRAs..

-Dave-
Sachin Patel wrote:
I don't think they should go on the wiki.  Why can't we add them as 
Wish List Jira's with #votes and have the wish list query exported 
and posted?  This way further discussion and progress on each of 
the items could be tracked as well.


- sachin



On Apr 5, 2006, at 4:07 PM, Dave Colasurdo wrote:

I tried to order them by priority (based on number of times 
mentioned) within each category/sub-category..  The ones that were 
mentioned the most are first on the list and so forth..  Items 
that were mentioned only once are listed in random order..


Anyway, I've updated the list below with the number of requests 
for each item.   I've denoted with *(number)*.  Absence of a 
number indicates one request for an item.


Of course the community needs to digest the input and decide on  
priorities.


BTW, I have added Global JNDI ENC to the list..

If folks agree with the format, I will post to the wiki..

-Dave-


Matt Hogstrom wrote:

This is great Dave...I think we need to prioritze them as well.  
Can you translate the priorty from the other e-mails to this?

Matt
Dave Colasurdo wrote:


Excellent feedback from all..

Here is an attempt to consolidate the feedback into one list. 
(Hope I'm not stepping on anyone's toes.)  I've grouped by a few 
high level categories..
Of course, one could argue that some of the items could fall 
into multiple categories...  Any glaring omissions?




Specifications/Functionality

-JDK 5 for Geronimo *(11)*
-JEE 5 *(3)*
  Enterprise JavaBeans 3.0 *(5)*
  Java Servlet 2.5
  Java ServerPages 2.1
  Java ServerPages Standard Tag Library
  Java Persistence Architecture (is this part of Java EE?)
  Java Transaction API (JTA)
  J2EE Management
  J2EE Connector Architecture
-JAX-WS support *(4)*
-GBean improvements (doc, lifecycle, dependencies, dep. injection, 
..) *(2)*

-Dynamic Queries *(2)*
-javax.persistence
-annotated session beans.
-Support for JSR-168 (Portlet API)
-ServiceMix
-Maven2 support
-service/daemon wrapper
-Remove the requirement of the openejb-jar.xml??
-Better db tools in the admin console
-Configuration management, possibility to make a production 
version without some current modules (e.g. OpenEJB or ActiveMQ),
  there are end users who don't have the resources (memory, disk) 
to run Geronimo fully equipped and they don't need every

  feature of the J2EE stack
- Continued support of Jetty
-First class HttpSession clustering.
-More integration with Apache mod_JK/mod_ajp . It would be nice if 
a request would continue through a pool until it landed

on a server with that webapp.
-Mass deployment tools that allow the server 'cloning' and rollout 
mentioned during Geronimos initial days.

-Global JNDI ENC

Tools
*
-NetBeans support *(3)*
-JDK 5 for launching and running the Geronimo Eclipse plugin *(2)*
-Eclipse plugin improvement (it is really good but think it could be
better)
-Eclipse mini-roadmap (from Sachin)
  - run resources directly from the workspace, so the ear isn't 
built and re-packaged on every publish
  - More control over the runtime/server wizards, publish process, 
and server manageme

Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!

2006-04-06 Thread David Blevins



On Apr 5, 2006, at 3:13 PM, Matt Hogstrom wrote:

Good points Tony, thanks.  We are delinquent in the crusty bug  
situation.  We'll see if we can sort that out as we get through 1.1.


Who's Tony ;-P

Regardless, great feedback Toby.  And as Matt says sorry about the  
lack of bug uptake


I whipped together this report which will now be sent to the dev list  
on the 1st and 15th of every month.  I hope it will help the  
absorbency of JIRA items by both developers and people looking to  
contribute.


Cool thing about sending them to the dev list is that they'll get  
archived and we can be embarrassed by our inaction for years to come :)


You weren't kidding about some of them being old, you've got one in  
there from Aug 05, 2004 !!!


-David

On Apr 6, 2006, at 3:53 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Unassigned issues (273) as of 2006-04-06
 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

 1 WEEK (8 issues)

 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

  Key   
SummaryReporter   Created
 GERONIMO-1800 SPECjAppServer2004 Deployment  
Descriptors   Vasily Zakharov Apr 03, 2006
 GERONIMO-1804 The name of JNDI/RMI service provider is hardcoded  
in the sources.  Andrey Pavlenko Apr 05, 2006
 GERONIMO-1805 org.apache.geronimo.directory.RunningTest hangs on  
BEA Jrockit VMs  Alexei Zakharov Apr 05, 2006
 GERONIMO-1815 Remove empty config-store  
directory Dain Sundstrom  Apr  
06, 2006
 GERONIMO-1792 Ant Tasks Mirror of Maven  
Plugins   Heinie Barnard  Mar  
30, 2006
 GERONIMO-1801 Restart/Shutdown functionality for Geronimo when  
using Java Service Mario Ruebsam   Apr 04, 2006

   Wrapper
 GERONIMO-1812 When already deployed application is hot deployed  
once gain , ServerMansoor Apr 06, 2006

   doesn't delete the module from hot deployed directory
 GERONIMO-1813 When already deployed application is hot deployed  
once gain , ServerMansoor Apr 06, 2006

   doesn't delete the module from hot deployed directory

 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

 30 DAYS (37 issues)

 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

  Key
SummaryReporter  Created
 GERONIMO-1733 Module migration to Maven 2:  
mail Jacek Laskowski   Mar 09,  
2006
 GERONIMO-1734 Module migration to Maven 2: naming- 
builder   Jacek Laskowski   Mar 09, 2006
 GERONIMO-1735 Module migration to Maven 2:  
transaction  Jacek Laskowski   Mar 09,  
2006
 GERONIMO-1736 Module migration to Maven 2: web- 
builder  Jacek Laskowski   Mar 09, 2006
 GERONIMO-1739 Plugin migration to Maven 2: geronimo-izpack- 
plugin   Jacek Laskowski   Mar 09, 2006
 GERONIMO-1747 HTTP-methods  
checks   Ilya  
Platonov Mar 16, 2006
 GERONIMO-1749 Server Logs portlet - Web Access Log Viewer  
improvements  Vamsavardhana Reddy   Mar 17, 2006
 GERONIMO-1726 Module migration to Maven 2:  
common   Jacek Laskowski   Mar 09,  
2006
 GERONIMO-1727 Module migration to Maven2:  
connector Jacek Laskowski   Mar 09,  
2006
 GERONIMO-1752 JMS Server portlet - Edits to JMS Network Listener  
are lost upon  Vamsavardhana Reddy   Mar 20, 2006

   server restart
 GERONIMO-1751 Deployment of ear with external plan using "Deploy  
New" console   John Sisson   Mar 20, 2006

   option caused FileNotFoundException
 GERONIMO-1756 Move from 1.1-dev version of commons-fileupload to  
version 1.1John Sisson   Mar 20, 2006
 GERONIMO-1758 Can not use Realm with SQL database over connection  
pool  Torsten Markwardt Mar 21, 2006
 GERONIMO-1761 Change geronimo-util module to geronimo-crypto, give  
credit where Aaron Mulder  Mar 22, 2006

   credit is due
 GERONIMO-1762 Create a derby network /embedded XA datasource via  
admin console  Lin Sun   Mar 23, 2006

   fail
 GERONIMO-1763 default config.xml does not list Jetty AJP  
connector  Aaron Mulder  Mar 23, 2006
 GERONIMO-1786 JMS Listeners for protocols activeio, peer and  
openwire fail to   Donald Woods  Mar 28, 2006

   start
 GERONIMO-1789 Exceptions while adding SQL Realm thru Admin  
Console  Vamsavardhana Reddy   Mar 29, 2006
 GERONIMO-1746 Updates to Logger through Log Manager portlet under  
Console are   Vamsavardhana Reddy   Mar 16, 2006

   not reflected in the server
 GERONIMO-1782 Properties File Login module fails after editing  
through Adm

Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!

2006-04-06 Thread Matt Hogstrom

Fair enough. When I made the comment I was thinking about a user that was interested in helping out
or working on Geronimo. I would expect them to look at the Wiki as opposed to mining in JIRAs.

Sachin Patel wrote:
Yes we should have both but I'm not sure if I agree with your second
statement. :) I think JIRA should be the first place users should go to
request a feature. The wiki will never encapsulate all the work that
needs to be done for a project. JIRA tells us this. Thus the wiki
should be used to bundle the wish-list and associate them to the themes
and priorities for a release. I think trying to keep jiras and the
wiki synchronized is invaluable and is unnecessary work. The wiki
should be the place where to look for what is planned for that release,
and the discussions around and links to jiras/threads for those items.
So the first step I think should be to open jira's and from there these
can be sorted and prioritized and pushed up into the wiki, I don't
think it should be the other way around. There is alot of things that
need to be cleaned up in current in JIRA and by using it as the first
place for work items this forces us to maintain and constantly scub
JIRA to provide an accurate indication of project status.

thats by 2 cents :)

- sachin

On Apr 5, 2006, at 6:12 PM, Matt Hogstrom wrote:

I think you need both. The Wiki is a place to look at what there is
to do...JIRA is the way to tell people your doing it.

Dave Colasurdo wrote:

Wasn't suggesting the wiki as the final resting spot, just a
temporary holding spot while the user requirements were being
gathered, tallied, discussed and prioritized by the community. It
works better than email threads passing in the night. No objection
to moving the output to JIRAs..

-Dave-
Sachin Patel wrote:

I don't think they should go on the wiki. Why can't we add them as
Wish List Jira's with #votes and have the wish list query exported
and posted? This way further discussion and progress on each of
the items could be tracked as well.

- sachin

On Apr 5, 2006, at 4:07 PM, Dave Colasurdo wrote:

I tried to order them by priority (based on number of times
mentioned) within each category/sub-category.. The ones that were
mentioned the most are first on the list and so forth.. Items
that were mentioned only once are listed in random order..

Anyway, I've updated the list below with the number of requests
for each item. I've denoted with *(number)*. Absence of a
number indicates one request for an item.

Of course the community needs to digest the input and decide on
priorities.

BTW, I have added Global JNDI ENC to the list..

If folks agree with the format, I will post to the wiki..

-Dave-

Matt Hogstrom wrote:

This is great Dave...I think we need to prioritze them as well.
Can you translate the priorty from the other e-mails to this?

Matt
Dave Colasurdo wrote:

Excellent feedback from all..

Here is an attempt to consolidate the feedback into one list.
(Hope I'm not stepping on anyone's toes.) I've grouped by a few
high level categories..
Of course, one could argue that some of the items could fall
into multiple categories... Any glaring omissions?

Specifications/Functionality

-JDK 5 for Geronimo *(11)*
-JEE 5 *(3)*
Enterprise JavaBeans 3.0 *(5)*
Java Servlet 2.5
Java ServerPages 2.1
Java ServerPages Standard Tag Library
Java Persistence Architecture (is this part of Java EE?)
Java Transaction API (JTA)
J2EE Management
J2EE Connector Architecture
-JAX-WS support *(4)*
-GBean improvements (doc, lifecycle, dependencies, dep. injection,
..) *(2)*

-Dynamic Queries *(2)*
-javax.persistence
-annotated session beans.
-Support for JSR-168 (Portlet API)
-ServiceMix
-Maven2 support
-service/daemon wrapper
-Remove the requirement of the openejb-jar.xml??
-Better db tools in the admin console
-Configuration management, possibility to make a production
version without some current modules (e.g. OpenEJB or ActiveMQ),
there are end users who don't have the resources (memory, disk)
to run Geronimo fully equipped and they don't need every

feature of the J2EE stack
- Continued support of Jetty
-First class HttpSession clustering.
-More integration with Apache mod_JK/mod_ajp . It would be nice if
a request would continue through a pool until it landed

on a server with that webapp.
-Mass deployment tools that allow the server 'cloning' and rollout
mentioned during Geronimos initial days.

-Global JNDI ENC

Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!

2006-04-06 Thread Dave Colasurdo

I've updated the wiki with all the feedback (including the latest from
Toby and Rohit)..

http://opensource.atlassian.com/confluence/oss/display/GERONIMO/Geronimo+User+Requirements

Dave Colasurdo wrote:
I tried to order them by priority (based on number of times mentioned)
within each category/sub-category.. The ones that were mentioned the
most are first on the list and so forth.. Items that were mentioned
only once are listed in random order..

Anyway, I've updated the list below with the number of requests for each
item. I've denoted with *(number)*. Absence of a number indicates one
request for an item.

Of course the community needs to digest the input and decide on
priorities.

BTW, I have added Global JNDI ENC to the list..

If folks agree with the format, I will post to the wiki..

-Dave-

Matt Hogstrom wrote:
This is great Dave...I think we need to prioritze them as well. Can
you translate the priorty from the other e-mails to this?

Matt

Dave Colasurdo wrote:

Excellent feedback from all..

Here is an attempt to consolidate the feedback into one list. (Hope
I'm not stepping on anyone's toes.) I've grouped by a few high level
categories..
Of course, one could argue that some of the items could fall into
multiple categories... Any glaring omissions?

Specifications/Functionality

-Dynamic Queries *(2)*
-javax.persistence
-annotated session beans.
-Support for JSR-168 (Portlet API)
-ServiceMix
-Maven2 support
-service/daemon wrapper
-Remove the requirement of the openejb-jar.xml??
-Better db tools in the admin console
-Configuration management, possibility to make a production version
without some current modules (e.g. OpenEJB or ActiveMQ),
there are end users who don't have the resources (memory, disk) to run
Geronimo fully equipped and they don't need every

feature of the J2EE stack
- Continued support of Jetty
-First class HttpSession clustering.
-More integration with Apache mod_JK/mod_ajp . It would be nice if a
request would continue through a pool until it landed

on a server with that webapp.
-Mass deployment tools that allow the server 'cloning' and rollout
mentioned during Geronimos initial days.

-Global JNDI ENC

Tools
*
-NetBeans support *(3)*
-JDK 5 for launching and running the Geronimo Eclipse plugin *(2)*
-Eclipse plugin improvement (it is really good but think it could be
better)
-Eclipse mini-roadmap (from Sachin)
- run resources directly from the workspace, so the ear isn't built
and re-packaged on every publish
- More control over the runtime/server wizards, publish process, and
server management
- Continue to build up the UI so we have a complete set of "form
editors" for the G deployment plans
- ability to see changes reflected live in something like the Common
Navigator as you modify your plans

- full synchronization between the source view and views using the model
- copy/paste, undo/redo support
-There's also plans in WTP to improve the Server Tools Framework to
make it easier to have more control over what defines your runtime.

Usability
*
-Deployment *(5)*
Less deployment requirements (simpler plans, more defaults, etc.)
Simplifying deployment (some means to generate geronimo deployment plans?
Easier way to deploy EAR Files
More application validation at deployment
Better redeployment to prevent requests from failing if they hit that
server during the redeploy.

-More powerful text configuration
-Migration path from Tomcat to Geronimo
-Shortcuts for building web services

Process
***
-More frequent releases incorporating more user feedback (small releases
more often vs. big releases only 4 times a year) *(7)*
-Geronimo Certified Partner Program (including Jetspeed-2 as a member).
*(2)*

Documentation *(10)*
*
-Tutorials *(4)*
How to use Geronimo with: Apache Axis, WSS4J, ActiveMQ
-Cookbooks
-Better documentation on deployment descriptors
-More detailed documentation about the architecture and Gbeans *(2)*
-A browsable table describing where to find all plans, etc. for each
deployed component or service.
-More documentaion on deploying EAR's, WAR's, EJB's, RAR's, classloading
and dependencies with that apps)

Examples *(4)*

-Examples for everything
-More documentation/examples for me should be more explicative models of
the basic openejb-jar.xml and ejb-jar.xml,

explaining which tag points where or what
Session beans, entity beans(BMP and CMP)
Message-Driven-Bean.

-Dave-

Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!

2006-04-05 Thread Rohit Rai

My hi fives!!!
 
1) Java 5.0 and JEE 5.0 support
2) Fully functional Console (Automate all tasks including creation of deployment plans) I have used SUN JAS web console and like it!
Focus on ease of use cause that is what general people need. I need my application running. I don't want to worry about the 1001
    catches and work around or procedures.
3) More and more documentations and easily available at one single place
4) Improved IDE integration, not only with Eclipse, but also include support for Netbeans, IntelliJ, etc. . .
5) Integrate or provide as addons, things like Struts Frameworks, JSF, Pluto, etc.-- Dream like you're never gonna die, Like like you're gonna die today!

Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!

2006-04-05 Thread Sachin Patel

Yes we should have both but I'm not sure if I agree with your second  
statement. :) I think JIRA should be the first place users should go  
to request a feature.  The wiki will never encapsulate all the work  
that needs to be done for a project.  JIRA tells us this.  Thus the  
wiki should be used to bundle the wish-list and associate them to the  
themes and priorities for a release.  I think trying to keep jiras  
and the wiki synchronized is invaluable and is unnecessary work.  The  
wiki should be the place where to look for what is planned for that  
release, and the discussions around and links to jiras/threads for  
those items. So the first step I think should be to open jira's and  
from there these can be sorted and prioritized and pushed up into the  
wiki, I don't think it should be the other way around.  There is alot  
of things that need to be cleaned up in current in JIRA and by using  
it as the first place for work items this forces us to maintain and  
constantly scub JIRA to provide an accurate indication of project  
status.


thats by 2 cents :)


- sachin



On Apr 5, 2006, at 6:12 PM, Matt Hogstrom wrote:

I think you need both.  The Wiki is a place to look at what there  
is to do...JIRA is the way to tell people your doing it.


Dave Colasurdo wrote:
Wasn't suggesting the wiki as the final resting spot, just a  
temporary holding spot while the user requirements were being  
gathered, tallied, discussed and prioritized by the community.  It  
works better than email threads passing in the night.  No  
objection to moving the output to JIRAs..

-Dave-
Sachin Patel wrote:
I don't think they should go on the wiki.  Why can't we add them  
as Wish List Jira's with #votes and have the wish list query  
exported and posted?  This way further discussion and progress on  
each of the items could be tracked as well.


- sachin



On Apr 5, 2006, at 4:07 PM, Dave Colasurdo wrote:

I tried to order them by priority (based on number of times  
mentioned) within each category/sub-category..  The ones that  
were mentioned the most are first on the list and so forth..   
Items that were mentioned only once are listed in random order..


Anyway, I've updated the list below with the number of requests  
for each item.   I've denoted with *(number)*.  Absence of a  
number indicates one request for an item.


Of course the community needs to digest the input and decide on   
priorities.


BTW, I have added Global JNDI ENC to the list..

If folks agree with the format, I will post to the wiki..

-Dave-


Matt Hogstrom wrote:

This is great Dave...I think we need to prioritze them as  
well.  Can you translate the priorty from the other e-mails to  
this?

Matt
Dave Colasurdo wrote:


Excellent feedback from all..

Here is an attempt to consolidate the feedback into one list.  
(Hope I'm not stepping on anyone's toes.)  I've grouped by a  
few high level categories..
Of course, one could argue that some of the items could fall  
into multiple categories...  Any glaring omissions?




Specifications/Functionality

-JDK 5 for Geronimo *(11)*
-JEE 5 *(3)*
  Enterprise JavaBeans 3.0 *(5)*
  Java Servlet 2.5
  Java ServerPages 2.1
  Java ServerPages Standard Tag Library
  Java Persistence Architecture (is this part of Java EE?)
  Java Transaction API (JTA)
  J2EE Management
  J2EE Connector Architecture
-JAX-WS support *(4)*
-GBean improvements (doc, lifecycle, dependencies, dep.  
injection, ..) *(2)*

-Dynamic Queries *(2)*
-javax.persistence
-annotated session beans.
-Support for JSR-168 (Portlet API)
-ServiceMix
-Maven2 support
-service/daemon wrapper
-Remove the requirement of the openejb-jar.xml??
-Better db tools in the admin console
-Configuration management, possibility to make a production  
version without some current modules (e.g. OpenEJB or ActiveMQ),
  there are end users who don't have the resources (memory,  
disk) to run Geronimo fully equipped and they don't need every

  feature of the J2EE stack
- Continued support of Jetty
-First class HttpSession clustering.
-More integration with Apache mod_JK/mod_ajp . It would be nice  
if a request would continue through a pool until it landed

on a server with that webapp.
-Mass deployment tools that allow the server 'cloning' and  
rollout mentioned during Geronimos initial days.

-Global JNDI ENC

Tools
*
-NetBeans support *(3)*
-JDK 5 for launching and running the Geronimo Eclipse plugin *(2)*
-Eclipse plugin improvement (it is really good but think it  
could be

better)
-Eclipse mini-roadmap (from Sachin)
  - run resources directly from the workspace, so the ear isn't  
built and re-packaged on every publish
  - More control over the runtime/server wizards, publish  
process, and server management
  - Continue to build up the UI so we have a complete set of  
"form editors" for the G deployment plans
  - ability to see changes reflected live in something like the  
Common Navigator as you modify your pla

Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!

2006-04-05 Thread Matt Hogstrom

Good points Tony, thanks. We are delinquent in the crusty bug situation. We'll see if we can sort
that out as we get through 1.1.

toby cabot wrote:

Hi David!

On Tue, Mar 28, 2006 at 12:00:35PM -0800, David Blevins wrote:

So this is the first of what I think should be a quarterly event.
Geronimo is ultimately your project and we committers are but your
humble servants. To serve you best, we need some critical high level
feedback to help us steer the project and focus on what matters most
to you!

OK, I'll start with things I like about Geronimo. At the top of the
list would have to be messages like yours. Working with the Geronimo
team is a pleasure, and I can't say that about every open source
project that I've worked with.

I like the emphasis on making things "just work." There's lots to be
done in that area (this is j2ee after all) but over the last couple of
years the dev team has made it a lot easier to deploy and run by
whittling down the complexity of the DD's needed.

I like that the developers think like users. Example: a couple of
times I've seen deployment messages like "element foo doesn't work
anymore, try element bar." Projects like Geronimo move fast, so it's
hard to keep up. Pointers like this help a lot because they point me
in the right direction.

Please, every user out there, give us your top 5 things we can do to
make Geronimo better for you.

I think my list will be a little off-the-wall since I'm not going to
focus on features:

1. There are currently 293 unassigned bugs. A few are mine, and it's
discouraging. I'd suggest assigning them to a developer quickly, even
if she can't work on them right off the bat. At least that way I know
that someone's responsible for looking at it.

2. I've lost track of the wiki situation, but it looks as if there are
still two active wikis. It would be great if these could be merged
into one.

3. Better Javadoc. Geronimo's code is solid and the architecture is
very robust, but a lot of what makes Geronimo cool gets lost because
it's not documented in places where wanna-be developers can find it.
Javadoc is a fantastic doc system, we really need to take better
advantage of it.

That's all I can think of for now, but I'll second the previous
suggestions for more frequent releases.

Thanks!
Toby

Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!

2006-04-05 Thread Matt Hogstrom

I think you need both. The Wiki is a place to look at what there is to do...JIRA is the way to tell
people your doing it.

Dave Colasurdo wrote:
Wasn't suggesting the wiki as the final resting spot, just a temporary
holding spot while the user requirements were being gathered, tallied,
discussed and prioritized by the community. It works better than email
threads passing in the night. No objection to moving the output to JIRAs..

-Dave-

Sachin Patel wrote:

I don't think they should go on the wiki. Why can't we add them as
Wish List Jira's with #votes and have the wish list query exported and
posted? This way further discussion and progress on each of the items
could be tracked as well.

- sachin

On Apr 5, 2006, at 4:07 PM, Dave Colasurdo wrote:

I tried to order them by priority (based on number of times
mentioned) within each category/sub-category.. The ones that were
mentioned the most are first on the list and so forth.. Items that
were mentioned only once are listed in random order..

Anyway, I've updated the list below with the number of requests for
each item. I've denoted with *(number)*. Absence of a number
indicates one request for an item.

Of course the community needs to digest the input and decide on
priorities.

BTW, I have added Global JNDI ENC to the list..

If folks agree with the format, I will post to the wiki..

-Dave-

Matt Hogstrom wrote:

This is great Dave...I think we need to prioritze them as well. Can
you translate the priorty from the other e-mails to this?

Matt
Dave Colasurdo wrote:

Excellent feedback from all..

Here is an attempt to consolidate the feedback into one list. (Hope
I'm not stepping on anyone's toes.) I've grouped by a few high
level categories..
Of course, one could argue that some of the items could fall into
multiple categories... Any glaring omissions?

Specifications/Functionality

-Dynamic Queries *(2)*
-javax.persistence
-annotated session beans.
-Support for JSR-168 (Portlet API)
-ServiceMix
-Maven2 support
-service/daemon wrapper
-Remove the requirement of the openejb-jar.xml??
-Better db tools in the admin console
-Configuration management, possibility to make a production version
without some current modules (e.g. OpenEJB or ActiveMQ),
there are end users who don't have the resources (memory, disk) to
run Geronimo fully equipped and they don't need every

feature of the J2EE stack
- Continued support of Jetty
-First class HttpSession clustering.
-More integration with Apache mod_JK/mod_ajp . It would be nice if a
request would continue through a pool until it landed

on a server with that webapp.
-Mass deployment tools that allow the server 'cloning' and rollout
mentioned during Geronimos initial days.

-Global JNDI ENC

Tools
*
-NetBeans support *(3)*
-JDK 5 for launching and running the Geronimo Eclipse plugin *(2)*
-Eclipse plugin improvement (it is really good but think it could be
better)
-Eclipse mini-roadmap (from Sachin)
- run resources directly from the workspace, so the ear isn't built
and re-packaged on every publish
- More control over the runtime/server wizards, publish process,
and server management
- Continue to build up the UI so we have a complete set of "form
editors" for the G deployment plans
- ability to see changes reflected live in something like the
Common Navigator as you modify your plans
- full synchronization between the source view and views using the
model

- copy/paste, undo/redo support
-There's also plans in WTP to improve the Server Tools Framework to
make it easier to have more control over what defines your runtime.

Usability
*
-Deployment *(5)*
Less deployment requirements (simpler plans, more defaults, etc.)
Simplifying deployment (some means to generate geronimo deployment
plans?

Easier way to deploy EAR Files
More application validation at deployment
Better redeployment to prevent requests from failing if they hit
that server during the redeploy.

-More powerful text configuration
-Migration path from Tomcat to Geronimo
-Shortcuts for building web services

Process
***
-More frequent releases incorporating more user feedback (small
releases more often vs. big releases only 4 times a year) *(7)*
-Geronimo Certified Partner Program (including Jetspeed-2 as a
member). *(2)*

Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!

2006-04-05 Thread Dave Colasurdo

Wasn't suggesting the wiki as the final resting spot, just a temporary 
holding spot while the user requirements were being gathered, tallied, 
discussed and prioritized by the community.  It works better than email 
threads passing in the night.  No objection to moving the output to 
JIRAs..


-Dave-

Sachin Patel wrote:
I don't think they should go on the wiki.  Why can't we add them as Wish 
List Jira's with #votes and have the wish list query exported and 
posted?  This way further discussion and progress on each of the items 
could be tracked as well.


- sachin



On Apr 5, 2006, at 4:07 PM, Dave Colasurdo wrote:

I tried to order them by priority (based on number of times mentioned) 
within each category/sub-category..  The ones that were mentioned the 
most are first on the list and so forth..  Items that were mentioned 
only once are listed in random order..


Anyway, I've updated the list below with the number of requests for 
each item.   I've denoted with *(number)*.  Absence of a number 
indicates one request for an item.


Of course the community needs to digest the input and decide on  
priorities.


BTW, I have added Global JNDI ENC to the list..

If folks agree with the format, I will post to the wiki..

-Dave-


Matt Hogstrom wrote:
This is great Dave...I think we need to prioritze them as well.  Can 
you translate the priorty from the other e-mails to this?

Matt
Dave Colasurdo wrote:

Excellent feedback from all..

Here is an attempt to consolidate the feedback into one list. (Hope 
I'm not stepping on anyone's toes.)  I've grouped by a few high 
level categories..
Of course, one could argue that some of the items could fall into 
multiple categories...  Any glaring omissions?




Specifications/Functionality

-JDK 5 for Geronimo *(11)*
-JEE 5 *(3)*
  Enterprise JavaBeans 3.0 *(5)*
  Java Servlet 2.5
  Java ServerPages 2.1
  Java ServerPages Standard Tag Library
  Java Persistence Architecture (is this part of Java EE?)
  Java Transaction API (JTA)
  J2EE Management
  J2EE Connector Architecture
-JAX-WS support *(4)*
-GBean improvements (doc, lifecycle, dependencies, dep. injection, ..) 
*(2)*

-Dynamic Queries *(2)*
-javax.persistence
-annotated session beans.
-Support for JSR-168 (Portlet API)
-ServiceMix
-Maven2 support
-service/daemon wrapper
-Remove the requirement of the openejb-jar.xml??
-Better db tools in the admin console
-Configuration management, possibility to make a production version 
without some current modules (e.g. OpenEJB or ActiveMQ),
  there are end users who don't have the resources (memory, disk) to 
run Geronimo fully equipped and they don't need every

  feature of the J2EE stack
- Continued support of Jetty
-First class HttpSession clustering.
-More integration with Apache mod_JK/mod_ajp . It would be nice if a 
request would continue through a pool until it landed

on a server with that webapp.
-Mass deployment tools that allow the server 'cloning' and rollout 
mentioned during Geronimos initial days.

-Global JNDI ENC

Tools
*
-NetBeans support *(3)*
-JDK 5 for launching and running the Geronimo Eclipse plugin *(2)*
-Eclipse plugin improvement (it is really good but think it could be
better)
-Eclipse mini-roadmap (from Sachin)
  - run resources directly from the workspace, so the ear isn't built 
and re-packaged on every publish
  - More control over the runtime/server wizards, publish process, and 
server management
  - Continue to build up the UI so we have a complete set of "form 
editors" for the G deployment plans
  - ability to see changes reflected live in something like the Common 
Navigator as you modify your plans
  - full synchronization between the source view and views using the 
model

  - copy/paste, undo/redo support
  -There's also plans in WTP to improve the Server Tools Framework to 
make it easier to have more control over what defines your runtime.



Usability
*
-Deployment *(5)*
  Less deployment requirements (simpler plans, more defaults, etc.)
  Simplifying deployment (some means to generate geronimo deployment 
plans?

  Easier  way to  deploy  EAR Files
  More application validation at deployment
  Better redeployment to prevent requests from failing if they hit 
that server during the  redeploy.

-More powerful text configuration
-Migration path from Tomcat to Geronimo
-Shortcuts for building web services


Process
***
-More frequent releases incorporating more user feedback (small 
releases  more often vs. big releases only 4 times a year) *(7)*
-Geronimo Certified Partner Program (including Jetspeed-2 as a 
member). *(2)*



Documentation *(10)*
*
-Tutorials *(4)*
  How to use Geronimo with: Apache Axis, WSS4J, ActiveMQ
-Cookbooks
-Better documentation on deployment descriptors
-More detailed documentation about the architecture and Gbeans *(2)*
-A browsable table describing where to find all plans, etc. for each 
deployed component or service.
-More documentaion on deployi

Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!

2006-04-05 Thread Sachin Patel

I don't think they should go on the wiki.  Why can't we add them as  
Wish List Jira's with #votes and have the wish list query exported  
and posted?  This way further discussion and progress on each of the  
items could be tracked as well.


- sachin



On Apr 5, 2006, at 4:07 PM, Dave Colasurdo wrote:

I tried to order them by priority (based on number of times  
mentioned) within each category/sub-category..  The ones that were  
mentioned the most are first on the list and so forth..  Items that  
were mentioned only once are listed in random order..


Anyway, I've updated the list below with the number of requests for  
each item.   I've denoted with *(number)*.  Absence of a number  
indicates one request for an item.


Of course the community needs to digest the input and decide on   
priorities.


BTW, I have added Global JNDI ENC to the list..

If folks agree with the format, I will post to the wiki..

-Dave-


Matt Hogstrom wrote:
This is great Dave...I think we need to prioritze them as well.   
Can you translate the priorty from the other e-mails to this?

Matt
Dave Colasurdo wrote:

Excellent feedback from all..

Here is an attempt to consolidate the feedback into one list.  
(Hope I'm not stepping on anyone's toes.)  I've grouped by a few  
high level categories..
Of course, one could argue that some of the items could fall into  
multiple categories...  Any glaring omissions?




Specifications/Functionality

-JDK 5 for Geronimo *(11)*
-JEE 5 *(3)*
  Enterprise JavaBeans 3.0 *(5)*
  Java Servlet 2.5
  Java ServerPages 2.1
  Java ServerPages Standard Tag Library
  Java Persistence Architecture (is this part of Java EE?)
  Java Transaction API (JTA)
  J2EE Management
  J2EE Connector Architecture
-JAX-WS support *(4)*
-GBean improvements (doc, lifecycle, dependencies, dep.  
injection, ..) *(2)*

-Dynamic Queries *(2)*
-javax.persistence
-annotated session beans.
-Support for JSR-168 (Portlet API)
-ServiceMix
-Maven2 support
-service/daemon wrapper
-Remove the requirement of the openejb-jar.xml??
-Better db tools in the admin console
-Configuration management, possibility to make a production version  
without some current modules (e.g. OpenEJB or ActiveMQ),
  there are end users who don't have the resources (memory, disk)  
to run Geronimo fully equipped and they don't need every

  feature of the J2EE stack
- Continued support of Jetty
-First class HttpSession clustering.
-More integration with Apache mod_JK/mod_ajp . It would be nice if  
a request would continue through a pool until it landed

on a server with that webapp.
-Mass deployment tools that allow the server 'cloning' and rollout  
mentioned during Geronimos initial days.

-Global JNDI ENC

Tools
*
-NetBeans support *(3)*
-JDK 5 for launching and running the Geronimo Eclipse plugin *(2)*
-Eclipse plugin improvement (it is really good but think it could be
better)
-Eclipse mini-roadmap (from Sachin)
  - run resources directly from the workspace, so the ear isn't  
built and re-packaged on every publish
  - More control over the runtime/server wizards, publish process,  
and server management
  - Continue to build up the UI so we have a complete set of "form  
editors" for the G deployment plans
  - ability to see changes reflected live in something like the  
Common Navigator as you modify your plans
  - full synchronization between the source view and views using  
the model

  - copy/paste, undo/redo support
  -There's also plans in WTP to improve the Server Tools Framework  
to make it easier to have more control over what defines your runtime.



Usability
*
-Deployment *(5)*
  Less deployment requirements (simpler plans, more defaults, etc.)
  Simplifying deployment (some means to generate geronimo  
deployment plans?

  Easier  way to  deploy  EAR Files
  More application validation at deployment
  Better redeployment to prevent requests from failing if they hit  
that server during the  redeploy.

-More powerful text configuration
-Migration path from Tomcat to Geronimo
-Shortcuts for building web services


Process
***
-More frequent releases incorporating more user feedback (small  
releases  more often vs. big releases only 4 times a year) *(7)*
-Geronimo Certified Partner Program (including Jetspeed-2 as a  
member). *(2)*



Documentation *(10)*
*
-Tutorials *(4)*
  How to use Geronimo with: Apache Axis, WSS4J, ActiveMQ
-Cookbooks
-Better documentation on deployment descriptors
-More detailed documentation about the architecture and Gbeans *(2)*
-A browsable table describing where to find all plans, etc. for  
each deployed component or service.
-More documentaion on deploying EAR's, WAR's, EJB's, RAR's,  
classloading and dependencies with that apps)


Examples *(4)*

-Examples for everything
-More documentation/examples for me should be more explicative  
models of the basic openejb-jar.xml and ejb-jar.xml,

   explaining which tag points where or what

Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!

2006-04-05 Thread Dave Colasurdo

I tried to order them by priority (based on number of times mentioned) 
within each category/sub-category..  The ones that were mentioned the 
most are first on the list and so forth..  Items that were mentioned 
only once are listed in random order..


Anyway, I've updated the list below with the number of requests for each 
item.   I've denoted with *(number)*.  Absence of a number indicates one 
request for an item.


Of course the community needs to digest the input and decide on  priorities.

BTW, I have added Global JNDI ENC to the list..

If folks agree with the format, I will post to the wiki..

-Dave-


Matt Hogstrom wrote:
This is great Dave...I think we need to prioritze them as well.  Can you 
translate the priorty from the other e-mails to this?


Matt

Dave Colasurdo wrote:

Excellent feedback from all..

Here is an attempt to consolidate the feedback into one list. (Hope 
I'm not stepping on anyone's toes.)  I've grouped by a few high level 
categories..
Of course, one could argue that some of the items could fall into 
multiple categories...  Any glaring omissions?




Specifications/Functionality

-JDK 5 for Geronimo *(11)*
-JEE 5 *(3)*
  Enterprise JavaBeans 3.0 *(5)*
  Java Servlet 2.5
  Java ServerPages 2.1
  Java ServerPages Standard Tag Library
  Java Persistence Architecture (is this part of Java EE?)
  Java Transaction API (JTA)
  J2EE Management
  J2EE Connector Architecture
-JAX-WS support *(4)*
-GBean improvements (doc, lifecycle, dependencies, dep. injection, ..) *(2)*
-Dynamic Queries *(2)*
-javax.persistence
-annotated session beans.
-Support for JSR-168 (Portlet API)
-ServiceMix
-Maven2 support
-service/daemon wrapper
-Remove the requirement of the openejb-jar.xml??
-Better db tools in the admin console
-Configuration management, possibility to make a production version 
without some current modules (e.g. OpenEJB or ActiveMQ),
  there are end users who don't have the resources (memory, disk) to 
run Geronimo fully equipped and they don't need every

  feature of the J2EE stack
- Continued support of Jetty
-First class HttpSession clustering.
-More integration with Apache mod_JK/mod_ajp . It would be nice if a 
request would continue through a pool until it landed

on a server with that webapp.
-Mass deployment tools that allow the server 'cloning' and rollout 
mentioned during Geronimos initial days.

-Global JNDI ENC

Tools
*
-NetBeans support *(3)*
-JDK 5 for launching and running the Geronimo Eclipse plugin *(2)*
-Eclipse plugin improvement (it is really good but think it could be
better)
-Eclipse mini-roadmap (from Sachin)
  - run resources directly from the workspace, so the ear isn't built 
and re-packaged on every publish
  - More control over the runtime/server wizards, publish process, and 
server management
  - Continue to build up the UI so we have a complete set of "form 
editors" for the G deployment plans
  - ability to see changes reflected live in something like the Common 
Navigator as you modify your plans

  - full synchronization between the source view and views using the model
  - copy/paste, undo/redo support
  -There's also plans in WTP to improve the Server Tools Framework to 
make it easier to have more control over what defines your runtime.



Usability
*
-Deployment *(5)*
  Less deployment requirements (simpler plans, more defaults, etc.)
  Simplifying deployment (some means to generate geronimo deployment plans?
  Easier  way to  deploy  EAR Files
  More application validation at deployment
  Better redeployment to prevent requests from failing if they hit that 
server during the  redeploy.

-More powerful text configuration
-Migration path from Tomcat to Geronimo
-Shortcuts for building web services


Process
***
-More frequent releases incorporating more user feedback (small releases 
 more often vs. big releases only 4 times a year) *(7)*
-Geronimo Certified Partner Program (including Jetspeed-2 as a member). 
*(2)*



Documentation *(10)*
*
-Tutorials *(4)*
  How to use Geronimo with: Apache Axis, WSS4J, ActiveMQ
-Cookbooks
-Better documentation on deployment descriptors
-More detailed documentation about the architecture and Gbeans *(2)*
-A browsable table describing where to find all plans, etc. for each 
deployed component or service.
-More documentaion on deploying EAR's, WAR's, EJB's, RAR's, classloading 
and dependencies with that apps)


Examples *(4)*

-Examples for everything
-More documentation/examples for me should be more explicative models of 
the basic openejb-jar.xml and ejb-jar.xml,

   explaining which tag points where or what
  Session beans, entity beans(BMP and CMP)
  Message-Driven-Bean.




-Dave-

Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!

2006-04-05 Thread Dain Sundstrom

Dave C, can you add this to the list.  It came up on the dev list the  
yesterday as well.


-dain

On Apr 5, 2006, at 7:25 AM, Manu George wrote:


Hi,

Is there any specific reason whythere is no Global JNDI ENC in  
Geronimo? I remember in the old days pre-M5 there used to be jndi- 
name tags in the resource deployment plans. Why was this feature  
removed if it was there?


It would be helpful to have a Global JNDI ENC.

Regards
Manu

Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!

2006-04-05 Thread toby cabot

Hi David!

On Tue, Mar 28, 2006 at 12:00:35PM -0800, David Blevins wrote:
> So this is the first of what I think should be a quarterly event.   
> Geronimo is ultimately your project and we committers are but your  
> humble servants.  To serve you best, we need some critical high level  
> feedback to help us steer the project and focus on what matters most  
> to you!

OK, I'll start with things I like about Geronimo.  At the top of the
list would have to be messages like yours.  Working with the Geronimo
team is a pleasure, and I can't say that about every open source
project that I've worked with.

I like the emphasis on making things "just work."  There's lots to be
done in that area (this is j2ee after all) but over the last couple of
years the dev team has made it a lot easier to deploy and run by
whittling down the complexity of the DD's needed.

I like that the developers think like users.  Example: a couple of
times I've seen deployment messages like "element foo doesn't work
anymore, try element bar."  Projects like Geronimo move fast, so it's
hard to keep up.  Pointers like this help a lot because they point me
in the right direction.

> Please, every user out there, give us your top 5 things we can do to  
> make Geronimo better for you.

I think my list will be a little off-the-wall since I'm not going to
focus on features:

1. There are currently 293 unassigned bugs.  A few are mine, and it's
discouraging.  I'd suggest assigning them to a developer quickly, even
if she can't work on them right off the bat.  At least that way I know
that someone's responsible for looking at it.

2. I've lost track of the wiki situation, but it looks as if there are
still two active wikis.  It would be great if these could be merged
into one.

3. Better Javadoc.  Geronimo's code is solid and the architecture is
very robust, but a lot of what makes Geronimo cool gets lost because
it's not documented in places where wanna-be developers can find it.
Javadoc is a fantastic doc system, we really need to take better
advantage of it.

That's all I can think of for now, but I'll second the previous
suggestions for more frequent releases.

Thanks!
Toby

Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!

2006-04-05 Thread Matt Hogstrom

This is great Dave...I think we need to prioritze them as well. Can you translate the priorty from
the other e-mails to this?

Matt

Dave Colasurdo wrote:

Excellent feedback from all..

Here is an attempt to consolidate the feedback into one list. (Hope I'm
not stepping on anyone's toes.) I've grouped by a few high level
categories..
Of course, one could argue that some of the items could fall into
multiple categories... Any glaring omissions?

Specifications/Functionality

-JDK 5 for Geronimo
-JEE 5
Enterprise JavaBeans 3.0
Java Servlet 2.5
Java ServerPages 2.1
Java ServerPages Standard Tag Library
Java Persistence Architecture (is this part of Java EE?)
Java Transaction API (JTA)
J2EE Management
J2EE Connector Architecture
-JAX-WS support
-javax.persistence
-Dynamic Queries
-annotated session beans.
-Support for JSR-168 (Portlet API)
-ServiceMix
-GBean improvements (doc, lifecycle, dependencies, dep. injection, ..)
-Maven2 support
-service/daemon wrapper
-Remove the requirement of the openejb-jar.xml??
-Better db tools in the admin console
-Configuration management, possibility to make a production version
without some current modules (e.g. OpenEJB or ActiveMQ),
there are end users who don't have the resources (memory, disk) to run
Geronimo fully equipped and they don't need every

feature of the J2EE stack
- Continued support of Jetty
-First class HttpSession clustering.
-More integration with Apache mod_JK/mod_ajp . It would be nice if a
request would continue through a pool until it landed

on a server with that webapp.
-Mass deployment tools that allow the server 'cloning' and rollout
mentioned during Geronimos initial days.

Tools
*
-JDK 5 for launching and running the Geronimo Eclipse plugin
-Eclipse plugin improvement (it is really good but think it could be
better)
-Eclipse mini-roadmap (from Sachin)
- run resources directly from the workspace, so the ear isn't built
and re-packaged on every publish
- More control over the runtime/server wizards, publish process, and
server management
- Continue to build up the UI so we have a complete set of "form
editors" for the G deployment plans
- ability to see changes reflected live in something like the Common
Navigator as you modify your plans

-NetBeans support

Usability
*
-Deployment
Less deployment requirements (simpler plans, more defaults, etc.)
Simplifying deployment (some means to generate geronimo deployment plans?
Easier way to deploy EAR Files
More application validation at deployment
Better redeployment to prevent requests from failing if they hit that
server during the redeploy.

-More powerful text configuration
-Migration path from Tomcat to Geronimo
-Shortcuts for building web services

Process
***
-More frequent releases incorporating more user feedback (small releases
more often vs. big releases only 4 times a year)

-Geronimo Certified Partner Program (including Jetspeed-2 as a member).

Documentation
*
-Tutorials
How to use Geronimo with: Apache Axis, WSS4J, ActiveMQ
-Cookbooks
-Better documentation on deployment descriptors
-More detailed documentation about the architecture.
-A browsable table describing where to find all plans, etc. for each
deployed component or service.
-More documentaion on deploying EAR's, WAR's, EJB's, RAR's, classloading
and dependencies with that apps)

Examples

-Examples for everything
-More documentation/examples for me should be more explicative models of
the basic openejb-jar.xml and ejb-jar.xml,

explaining which tag points where or what
Session beans, entity beans(BMP and CMP)
Message-Driven-Bean.

-Dave-

Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!

2006-04-05 Thread Manu George

Hi,
 
Is there any specific reason whythere is no Global JNDI ENC in
Geronimo? I remember in the old days pre-M5 there used to be jndi-name
tags in the resource deployment plans. Why was this feature removed if
it was there?

It would be helpful to have a Global JNDI ENC. 

Regards
Manu

Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!

2006-04-05 Thread Dave Colasurdo


Excellent feedback from all..

Here is an attempt to consolidate the feedback into one list. (Hope I'm 
not stepping on anyone's toes.)  I've grouped by a few high level 
categories..
Of course, one could argue that some of the items could fall into 
multiple categories...  Any glaring omissions?


Specifications/Functionality

-JDK 5 for Geronimo
-JEE 5
  Enterprise JavaBeans 3.0
  Java Servlet 2.5
  Java ServerPages 2.1
  Java ServerPages Standard Tag Library
  Java Persistence Architecture (is this part of Java EE?)
  Java Transaction API (JTA)
  J2EE Management
  J2EE Connector Architecture
-JAX-WS support
-javax.persistence
-Dynamic Queries
-annotated session beans.
-Support for JSR-168 (Portlet API)
-ServiceMix
-GBean improvements (doc, lifecycle, dependencies, dep. injection, ..)
-Maven2 support
-service/daemon wrapper
-Remove the requirement of the openejb-jar.xml??
-Better db tools in the admin console
-Configuration management, possibility to make a production version 
without some current modules (e.g. OpenEJB or ActiveMQ),
  there are end users who don't have the resources (memory, disk) to 
run Geronimo fully equipped and they don't need every

  feature of the J2EE stack
- Continued support of Jetty
-First class HttpSession clustering.
-More integration with Apache mod_JK/mod_ajp . It would be nice if a 
request would continue through a pool until it landed

on a server with that webapp.
-Mass deployment tools that allow the server 'cloning' and rollout 
mentioned during Geronimos initial days.


Tools
*
-JDK 5 for launching and running the Geronimo Eclipse plugin
-Eclipse plugin improvement (it is really good but think it could be
better)
-Eclipse mini-roadmap (from Sachin)
  - run resources directly from the workspace, so the ear isn't built 
and re-packaged on every publish
  - More control over the runtime/server wizards, publish process, and 
server management
  - Continue to build up the UI so we have a complete set of "form 
editors" for the G deployment plans
  - ability to see changes reflected live in something like the Common 
Navigator as you modify your plans

  - full synchronization between the source view and views using the model
  - copy/paste, undo/redo support
  -There's also plans in WTP to improve the Server Tools Framework to 
make it easier to have more control over what defines your runtime.

-NetBeans support

Usability
*
-Deployment
  Less deployment requirements (simpler plans, more defaults, etc.)
  Simplifying deployment (some means to generate geronimo deployment plans?
  Easier  way to  deploy  EAR Files
  More application validation at deployment
  Better redeployment to prevent requests from failing if they hit that 
server during the  redeploy.

-More powerful text configuration
-Migration path from Tomcat to Geronimo
-Shortcuts for building web services


Process
***
-More frequent releases incorporating more user feedback (small releases 
more often vs. big releases only 4 times a year)

-Geronimo Certified Partner Program (including Jetspeed-2 as a member).


Documentation
*
-Tutorials
  How to use Geronimo with: Apache Axis, WSS4J, ActiveMQ
-Cookbooks
-Better documentation on deployment descriptors
-More detailed documentation about the architecture.
-A browsable table describing where to find all plans, etc. for each 
deployed component or service.
-More documentaion on deploying EAR's, WAR's, EJB's, RAR's, classloading 
and dependencies with that apps)


Examples

-Examples for everything
-More documentation/examples for me should be more explicative models of 
the basic openejb-jar.xml and ejb-jar.xml,

   explaining which tag points where or what
  Session beans, entity beans(BMP and CMP)
  Message-Driven-Bean.


-Dave-

Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!

2006-04-04 Thread ian . d . stewart

I would at to the other requests:

  Support for JSR-168 (Portlet API)

If memory serves, the Geronimo Console is actually a Portal App, so this is
probably already implemented, but I didn't see this documented at
http://geronimo.apache.org (which doesn't necessarily mean that it isn't
documented, just that I couldn't find it).

Ian

It's better to be hated for who you are
than loved for who you are not

Ian D. Stewart
Appl Dev Analyst-Advisory, DCS Automation
JPMorganChase Global Technology Infrastructure
Phone: (614) 244-2564
Pager: (888) 260-0078

  Werner Punz   

  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>   To:   
user@geronimo.apache.org  
  Sent by: newscc:  

  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]    Subject:  Re: User Feedback 
Request -- this means you!  
  rg>   

  04/04/2006 05:54  

  AM

  Please respond to 

  user  

Dain Sundstrom schrieb:
> On Mar 28, 2006, at 12:50 PM,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> 2) Implementation of J2EE 1.5 (or JEE 5 or whatever we're calling it
>> these
>> days)
>
> JEE 5 is a huge cacophony of specifications. Can you be more specific
> about which specs you would like to see finished first?
>
javax.persistence
and the annotated session beans.

JSF is probably a plug and play anyway so no reason to have
that one there ;-)

Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!

2006-04-04 Thread Werner Punz

Dain Sundstrom schrieb:
> On Mar 28, 2006, at 12:50 PM,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> 
>> 2) Implementation of J2EE 1.5 (or JEE 5 or whatever we're calling it
>> these
>> days)
> 
> JEE 5 is a huge cacophony of specifications. Can you be more specific
> about which specs you would like to see finished first?
> 
javax.persistence
and the annotated session beans.

JSF is probably a plug and play anyway so no reason to have
that one there ;-)

Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!

2006-04-04 Thread Werner Punz

David Blevins schrieb:
> So this is the first of what I think should be a quarterly event. 
> Geronimo is ultimately your project and we committers are but your
> humble servants.  To serve you best, we need some critical high level
> feedback to help us steer the project and focus on what matters most to
> you!

Two things:
Better db tools in the admin console
EJB3 support (at least javax.persistence)

Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!

2006-03-30 Thread Oli Kessler

Here we go:

1. JDK 1.5
2. Better documentation (deployment descriptors, sample applications)
3. GBean improvements (doc, lifecycle, dependencies, dep. injection, ..)
4. Maven2 support
5. service/daemon wrapper

Cheers,
-ok

David Blevins wrote:
> Very excellent feedback everyone!  Keep it coming.  Don't be shy.
> 
> And definitely post your top 5 even if someone else has already  covered
> your items.  The number of times we see certain things  mentioned is a
> big indicator of demand.
> 
> 
> -David
>

Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!

2006-03-29 Thread Stefan Schmidt


Ok, here are my priorities:

1) JDK 1.5 support
2) EJB 3
3) JAX-WS
4) more minor releases
5) More docs on GBeans (explaining its merits and implementation in 
different scenarios)


Regards,

Stefan Schmidt


David Blevins wrote:
So this is the first of what I think should be a quarterly event.  
Geronimo is ultimately your project and we committers are but your 
humble servants.  To serve you best, we need some critical high level 
feedback to help us steer the project and focus on what matters most 
to you!


Please, every user out there, give us your top 5 things we can do to 
make Geronimo better for you.  Here is my list:


1)  More interaction with you guys, the users!
2)  More frequent releases incorporating more user feedback (small 
releases more often vs. big releases only 4 times a year)

3)  Less deployment requirements (simpler plans, more defaults, etc.)
4)  More application validation at deployment
5)  More powerful text configuration

That's just to get the ball rolling.  More detail is always good if 
you have the time.  In general anything you think we need to correct 
as a community, technical or non-technical.  Let us know.


If you've ever uttered the words, "Geronimo would be such a great 
project if it only" then now is your time to shine.


We want to hear from everyone!  This is not just for the "hard-core" 
Geronimo users or J2EE experts.  If you are new to J2EE and downloaded 
Geronimo and had to give up after an hour of no progress, let us know 
what we might do!



It's all about you.


Best Regards,
David Blevins

Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!

2006-03-29 Thread Glaucio Scheibel


Ok, that's what I need:

1. Support for Java 5
2. Dynamic Queries
3. Remove the requirement of the openejb-jar.xml
4. Easier  way to  deploy  EAR Files
5. EJB 3 /JavaEE 5

David Blevins wrote:

Very excellent feedback everyone!  Keep it coming.  Don't be shy.

And definitely post your top 5 even if someone else has already 
covered your items.  The number of times we see certain things 
mentioned is a big indicator of demand.



-David

Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!

2006-03-29 Thread David Blevins


Very excellent feedback everyone!  Keep it coming.  Don't be shy.

And definitely post your top 5 even if someone else has already  
covered your items.  The number of times we see certain things  
mentioned is a big indicator of demand.



-David

Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!

2006-03-29 Thread ian . d . stewart

+1

It's better to be hated for who you are
than loved for who you are not

Ian D. Stewart
Appl Dev Analyst-Advisory, DCS Automation
JPMorganChase Global Technology Infrastructure
Phone: (614) 244-2564
Pager: (888) 260-0078

  Mario Rübsam   
  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]To:   
user@geronimo.apache.org
  com> cc: 
   Subject:  Re: User Feedback 
Request -- this means you!
  03/29/2006 03:15 
  AM   
  Please respond to
  user 

Hi,

Jian Liao wrote:
> Setup something like JBoss Certified Partner Program
> <http://www.jboss.org/partners/program>. I would like to see Jetspeed-2
> joined Geronimo Certfied Partner Program:)
> It will encourage more program, opensource project to integrate with
> Geronimo.
>
> - Jian Liao
>

I really don't know why a partner program encourages integration.
There are some reasons why we moved to Geronimo. One is that certified
thingy, which brings more commercial pressure in development. I really
like the open documentation and discussion with geronimo community and
committers. No need for privileged certified partners.

-Mario

Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!

2006-03-29 Thread Sachin Patel

Oh and of course the problem everyone is running into... launching  
eclipse with jdk 5 :)

- sachin



On Mar 29, 2006, at 9:19 AM, Sachin Patel wrote:

Theres are lots of planned improvements coming... The biggest I  
think from a user experience is being able to run resources  
directly from the workspace, so the ear isn't built and re-packaged  
on every publish.  Also, the plugin is built using the Generic  
Server Framework which restricts some of the stuff we can do, so a  
good chunk of it will be re-written to move away from this in order  
to have more control over the runtime/server wizards, publish  
process, and server management.  Finally, we'll need to continue to  
build up the UI so we have a complete set of "form editors" for the  
G deployment plans.  This is the basis of what we need and which  
afterwards we can start getting really fancy with the power of  
EMF... like the ability to see changes reflected live in something  
like the Common Navigator as you modify your plans and full  
synchronization between the source view and views using the model,  
copy/paste, undo/redo support.


Theres also plans in WTP to improve the Server Tools Framework to  
make it easier to have more control over what defines your runtime.


Is there anything other then this you had in mind?

- sachin



On Mar 28, 2006, at 9:14 PM, Olivier Voutat wrote:

3) Eclipse plugin improvement (it is really good but think it  
could be better)

Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!

2006-03-29 Thread Sachin Patel

Theres are lots of planned improvements coming... The biggest I think  
from a user experience is being able to run resources directly from  
the workspace, so the ear isn't built and re-packaged on every  
publish.  Also, the plugin is built using the Generic Server  
Framework which restricts some of the stuff we can do, so a good  
chunk of it will be re-written to move away from this in order to  
have more control over the runtime/server wizards, publish process,  
and server management.  Finally, we'll need to continue to build up  
the UI so we have a complete set of "form editors" for the G  
deployment plans.  This is the basis of what we need and which  
afterwards we can start getting really fancy with the power of EMF...  
like the ability to see changes reflected live in something like the  
Common Navigator as you modify your plans and full synchronization  
between the source view and views using the model, copy/paste, undo/ 
redo support.


Theres also plans in WTP to improve the Server Tools Framework to  
make it easier to have more control over what defines your runtime.


Is there anything other then this you had in mind?

- sachin



On Mar 28, 2006, at 9:14 PM, Olivier Voutat wrote:

3) Eclipse plugin improvement (it is really good but think it could  
be better)

Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!

2006-03-29 Thread VascoAce




This is my list:
 
 1) Support for JDK 1.5 2) Geronimo tutorials (How to use 
Geronimo with: Apache Axis,  WSS4J, ActiveMQ).
 3) It would be great to have NetBeans support.
 
Thanks,
 
Alberto

Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!

2006-03-29 Thread Dennis Cartier

1) JDK 5.0
2) 1st class HttpSession clustering. If this means full WADI support I
am all for it.
3) Better redeployment to prevent requests from failing if they hit
that server during the  redeploy.
4) More integration with Apache mod_JK/mod_ajp . It would be nice if a
request would continue through a pool until it landed on a server with
that webapp. I can keep dreaming ;)
5) Mass deployment tools that allow the server 'cloning' and rollout
mentioned during Geronimos initial days. (I am not sure if this may
already be possible).

To be honest I have not started using Geronimo yet and have been
waiting on the sidelines until I saw the benefits of making the
switch. I could care less about the J2EE support.

Dennis

--

"The music business is a cruel and shallow money trench, a long
plastic hallway where thieves and pimps run free, and good men die
like dogs. There's also a negative side. "

Hunter S. Thompson, US journalist (1939 – 2005)

Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!

2006-03-29 Thread Olivier Voutat

More documentation/examples for me should be more explicative models of the basic openejb-jar.xml and ejb-jar.xml, explaining which tag points where or what ? Until now I got session beans, entity beans(BMP and CMP) working thanks to Aaron support. Still fighting on Message-Driven-Bean. 
Best Regards,Olivier VoutatOn 3/29/06, Ueberbach, Michael <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Here are 4 issues (as they just come into my mind)1) Simplifying deployment (some means to generate geronimo deployment plans?)
2) Dynamic queries (as already anounced)3) Shortcuts for building web services4) More minor releases (if possible)kind regardsMichael-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-Von: David Blevins [mailto:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Gesendet: Dienstag, 28. März 2006 22:01An: user@geronimo.apache.orgBetreff: User Feedback Request -- this means you!
So this is the first of what I think should be a quarterly event.Geronimo is ultimately your project and we committers are but yourhumble servants.  To serve you best, we need some critical high level
feedback to help us steer the project and focus on what matters mostto you!Please, every user out there, give us your top 5 things we can do tomake Geronimo better for you.  Here is my list:1)  More interaction with you guys, the users!
2)  More frequent releases incorporating more user feedback (smallreleases more often vs. big releases only 4 times a year)3)  Less deployment requirements (simpler plans, more defaults, etc.)4)  More application validation at deployment
5)  More powerful text configurationThat's just to get the ball rolling.  More detail is always good ifyou have the time.  In general anything you think we need to correctas a community, technical or non-technical.  Let us know.
If you've ever uttered the words, "Geronimo would be such a greatproject if it only" then now is your time to shine.We want to hear from everyone!  This is not just for the "hard-core"
Geronimo users or J2EE experts.  If you are new to J2EE anddownloaded Geronimo and had to give up after an hour of no progress,let us know what we might do!It's all about you.Best Regards,
David Blevins-- Olivier & Cidiane VoutatRua Praia de Muriú, 9188Cep 59092-390 / Natal - RNTel: (84) 3219-0427 Cel: (84) 9977-3917

AW: User Feedback Request -- this means you!

2006-03-29 Thread Ueberbach, Michael

Here are 4 issues (as they just come into my mind)

1) Simplifying deployment (some means to generate geronimo deployment plans?)
2) Dynamic queries (as already anounced)
3) Shortcuts for building web services
4) More minor releases (if possible)

kind regards
Michael

-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: David Blevins [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gesendet: Dienstag, 28. März 2006 22:01
An: user@geronimo.apache.org
Betreff: User Feedback Request -- this means you!


So this is the first of what I think should be a quarterly event.   
Geronimo is ultimately your project and we committers are but your  
humble servants.  To serve you best, we need some critical high level  
feedback to help us steer the project and focus on what matters most  
to you!

Please, every user out there, give us your top 5 things we can do to  
make Geronimo better for you.  Here is my list:

1)  More interaction with you guys, the users!
2)  More frequent releases incorporating more user feedback (small  
releases more often vs. big releases only 4 times a year)
3)  Less deployment requirements (simpler plans, more defaults, etc.)
4)  More application validation at deployment
5)  More powerful text configuration

That's just to get the ball rolling.  More detail is always good if  
you have the time.  In general anything you think we need to correct  
as a community, technical or non-technical.  Let us know.

If you've ever uttered the words, "Geronimo would be such a great  
project if it only" then now is your time to shine.

We want to hear from everyone!  This is not just for the "hard-core"  
Geronimo users or J2EE experts.  If you are new to J2EE and  
downloaded Geronimo and had to give up after an hour of no progress,  
let us know what we might do!


It's all about you.


Best Regards,
David Blevins

Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!

2006-03-29 Thread Mario Rübsam


Hi,

Jian Liao wrote:
Setup something like JBoss Certified Partner Program 
. I would like to see Jetspeed-2 
joined Geronimo Certfied Partner Program:)
It will encourage more program, opensource project to integrate with 
Geronimo.


- Jian Liao



I really don't know why a partner program encourages integration.
There are some reasons why we moved to Geronimo. One is that certified
thingy, which brings more commercial pressure in development. I really
like the open documentation and discussion with geronimo community and
committers. No need for privileged certified partners.

-Mario

Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!

2006-03-29 Thread Jian Liao

Setup something like JBoss Certified Partner Program. I would like to see Jetspeed-2 joined Geronimo Certfied Partner Program:)It will encourage more program, opensource project to integrate with Geronimo.
- Jian LiaoOn 3/29/06, Mario Rübsam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Here my short list:1) Support for JDK1.5 (both for Geronimo itself and the GeronimoEclipse plugin)2) configuration management, possibility to make a production versionwithout some current modules (
e.g. OpenEJB or ActiveMQ), there areend useres who don't have the resources (memory, disk) to run Geronimofully equipped and they don't need every feature of the J2EE stack3) more minor bugfix releases
4) More tutorials, documentaion, there is a growing base but if one isnew to geronimo he have a hard first time (esp. deploying EAR'sincluding WAR's, EJB's, RAR's, classloading and dependencies with
that apps)5) never push out Jetty support, we love Jetty ;)Thanks,MarioDavid Blevins wrote:> So this is the first of what I think should be a quarterly event.> Geronimo is ultimately your project and we committers are but your
> humble servants.  To serve you best, we need some critical high level> feedback to help us steer the project and focus on what matters most to> you!>> Please, every user out there, give us your top 5 things we can do to
> make Geronimo better for you.  Here is my list:>> 1)  More interaction with you guys, the users!> 2)  More frequent releases incorporating more user feedback (small> releases more often vs. big releases only 4 times a year)
> 3)  Less deployment requirements (simpler plans, more defaults, etc.)> 4)  More application validation at deployment> 5)  More powerful text configuration>> That's just to get the ball rolling.  More detail is always good if you
> have the time.  In general anything you think we need to correct as a> community, technical or non-technical.  Let us know.>> If you've ever uttered the words, "Geronimo would be such a great
> project if it only" then now is your time to shine.>> We want to hear from everyone!  This is not just for the "hard-core"> Geronimo users or J2EE experts.  If you are new to J2EE and downloaded
> Geronimo and had to give up after an hour of no progress, let us know> what we might do!>>> It's all about you.>>> Best Regards,> David Blevins>>
>

Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!

2006-03-28 Thread Mario Rübsam


Here my short list:

1) Support for JDK1.5 (both for Geronimo itself and the Geronimo
   Eclipse plugin)

2) configuration management, possibility to make a production version
   without some current modules (e.g. OpenEJB or ActiveMQ), there are
   end useres who don't have the resources (memory, disk) to run Geronimo
   fully equipped and they don't need every feature of the J2EE stack

3) more minor bugfix releases

4) More tutorials, documentaion, there is a growing base but if one is
   new to geronimo he have a hard first time (esp. deploying EAR's
   including WAR's, EJB's, RAR's, classloading and dependencies with
   that apps)

5) never push out Jetty support, we love Jetty ;)

Thanks,
Mario


David Blevins wrote:
So this is the first of what I think should be a quarterly event.  
Geronimo is ultimately your project and we committers are but your 
humble servants.  To serve you best, we need some critical high level 
feedback to help us steer the project and focus on what matters most to 
you!


Please, every user out there, give us your top 5 things we can do to 
make Geronimo better for you.  Here is my list:


1)  More interaction with you guys, the users!
2)  More frequent releases incorporating more user feedback (small 
releases more often vs. big releases only 4 times a year)

3)  Less deployment requirements (simpler plans, more defaults, etc.)
4)  More application validation at deployment
5)  More powerful text configuration

That's just to get the ball rolling.  More detail is always good if you 
have the time.  In general anything you think we need to correct as a 
community, technical or non-technical.  Let us know.


If you've ever uttered the words, "Geronimo would be such a great 
project if it only" then now is your time to shine.


We want to hear from everyone!  This is not just for the "hard-core" 
Geronimo users or J2EE experts.  If you are new to J2EE and downloaded 
Geronimo and had to give up after an hour of no progress, let us know 
what we might do!



It's all about you.


Best Regards,
David Blevins

Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!

2006-03-28 Thread Dain Sundstrom

For everyone that listed "more documentation", can you be more  
specific?  It will help us prioritize the effort to hit the most  
important stuff first.


Thanks,

-dain

On Mar 28, 2006, at 10:31 PM, mikael-aronsson wrote:


Same as below for me

- Original Message - From: "Christian Stolz"  
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2006 7:36 AM
Subject: Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!



Hi there,
here is my Top 5:
1. Support for JDK1.5
2. JAX-WS support
3. More documentation
4. NetBeans support
5. More frequent releases
Thanks Christian

Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!

2006-03-28 Thread mikael-aronsson

Same as below for me

- Original Message - 
From: "Christian Stolz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2006 7:36 AM
Subject: Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!

Hi there,

here is my Top 5:

1. Support for JDK1.5
2. JAX-WS support
3. More documentation
4. NetBeans support
5. More frequent releases

Thanks Christian

Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!

2006-03-28 Thread Christian Stolz

Hi there,

here is my Top 5:

1. Support for JDK1.5
2. JAX-WS support
3. More documentation
4. NetBeans support
5. More frequent releases

Thanks Christian

Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!

2006-03-28 Thread Olivier Voutat

Well, I'm not a reference but my five are:1) More documentation and example codes (and more understanding, sorry, but it  needs to be more clear for stupid newbies as me)2) Java 5.0 support3) Eclipse plugin improvement (it is really good but think it could be better)
4) and more documentation5) and more documentation (can't figure out something else)Best Regards,Olivier VoutatOn 3/28/06, Joel Bock
 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I have three requests:(1) More tutorials and example code for _everything_.(2) More detailed documentation about the architecture.(3) A browsable table describing where to find all plans, etc. for eachdeployed component or service.
Thanks,Joel-Original Message-From: David Blevins [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2006 12:01 PMTo: 
user@geronimo.apache.orgSubject: User Feedback Request -- this means you!So this is the first of what I think should be a quarterly event.Geronimo is ultimately your project and we committers are but your
humble servants.  To serve you best, we need some critical high levelfeedback to help us steer the project and focus on what matters mostto you!Please, every user out there, give us your top 5 things we can do to
make Geronimo better for you.  Here is my list:1)  More interaction with you guys, the users!2)  More frequent releases incorporating more user feedback (smallreleases more often vs. big releases only 4 times a year)
3)  Less deployment requirements (simpler plans, more defaults, etc.)4)  More application validation at deployment5)  More powerful text configurationThat's just to get the ball rolling.  More detail is always good if
you have the time.  In general anything you think we need to correctas a community, technical or non-technical.  Let us know.If you've ever uttered the words, "Geronimo would be such a greatproject if it only" then now is your time to shine.
We want to hear from everyone!  This is not just for the "hard-core"Geronimo users or J2EE experts.  If you are new to J2EE anddownloaded Geronimo and had to give up after an hour of no progress,
let us know what we might do!It's all about you.Best Regards,David Blevins-- Olivier & Cidiane VoutatRua Praia de Muriú, 9188
Cep 59092-390 / Natal - RNTel: (84) 3219-0427 Cel: (84) 9977-3917

RE: User Feedback Request -- this means you!

2006-03-28 Thread Joel Bock

I have three requests:
(1) More tutorials and example code for _everything_.
(2) More detailed documentation about the architecture.
(3) A browsable table describing where to find all plans, etc. for each
deployed component or service.


Thanks,
Joel

 

-Original Message-
From: David Blevins [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2006 12:01 PM
To: user@geronimo.apache.org
Subject: User Feedback Request -- this means you!

So this is the first of what I think should be a quarterly event.   
Geronimo is ultimately your project and we committers are but your  
humble servants.  To serve you best, we need some critical high level  
feedback to help us steer the project and focus on what matters most  
to you!

Please, every user out there, give us your top 5 things we can do to  
make Geronimo better for you.  Here is my list:

1)  More interaction with you guys, the users!
2)  More frequent releases incorporating more user feedback (small  
releases more often vs. big releases only 4 times a year)
3)  Less deployment requirements (simpler plans, more defaults, etc.)
4)  More application validation at deployment
5)  More powerful text configuration

That's just to get the ball rolling.  More detail is always good if  
you have the time.  In general anything you think we need to correct  
as a community, technical or non-technical.  Let us know.

If you've ever uttered the words, "Geronimo would be such a great  
project if it only" then now is your time to shine.

We want to hear from everyone!  This is not just for the "hard-core"  
Geronimo users or J2EE experts.  If you are new to J2EE and  
downloaded Geronimo and had to give up after an hour of no progress,  
let us know what we might do!


It's all about you.


Best Regards,
David Blevins

RE: User Feedback Request -- this means you!

2006-03-28 Thread Hossam Karim

Here you go,

1- Java 5.0 standard edition support
2- Java 5.0 standard edition support
3- Convince us with the GBean Architecture
4- Return back ServiceMix
5- At least EJB 3.0 and JAX-WS support

Thanks,
  Hossam Karim 

-Original Message-
From: David Blevins [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2006 10:01 PM
To: user@geronimo.apache.org
Subject: User Feedback Request -- this means you!

So this is the first of what I think should be a quarterly event.   
Geronimo is ultimately your project and we committers are but your  
humble servants.  To serve you best, we need some critical high level  
feedback to help us steer the project and focus on what matters most  
to you!

Please, every user out there, give us your top 5 things we can do to  
make Geronimo better for you.  Here is my list:

1)  More interaction with you guys, the users!
2)  More frequent releases incorporating more user feedback (small  
releases more often vs. big releases only 4 times a year)
3)  Less deployment requirements (simpler plans, more defaults, etc.)
4)  More application validation at deployment
5)  More powerful text configuration

That's just to get the ball rolling.  More detail is always good if  
you have the time.  In general anything you think we need to correct  
as a community, technical or non-technical.  Let us know.

If you've ever uttered the words, "Geronimo would be such a great  
project if it only" then now is your time to shine.

We want to hear from everyone!  This is not just for the "hard-core"  
Geronimo users or J2EE experts.  If you are new to J2EE and  
downloaded Geronimo and had to give up after an hour of no progress,  
let us know what we might do!


It's all about you.


Best Regards,
David Blevins

Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!

2006-03-28 Thread ian . d . stewart

This is my personal order based on 1) what I'm using today, and 2) Where I
see potential for use in the near future.  Obviously, others will have
their own priorities.

1) Java Servlet 2.5
2) Java ServerPages 2.1
3) Java ServerPages Standard Tag Library
4) Java Persistence Architecture (is this part of Java EE?)
5) Java Transaction API (JTA)
6) J2EE Management
7) Enterprise JavaBeans 3.0
8) J2EE Connector Architecture

Ian

It's better to be hated for who you are
than loved for who you are not

Ian D. Stewart
Appl Dev Analyst-Advisory, DCS Automation
JPMorganChase Global Technology Infrastructure
Phone: (614) 244-2564
Pager: (888) 260-0078

  Dain Sundstrom

  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  To:   
user@geronimo.apache.org  
   cc:  

  03/28/2006 04:05     Subject:  Re: User Feedback 
Request -- this means you!  
  PM

  Please respond to 

  user  

On Mar 28, 2006, at 12:50 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> 2) Implementation of J2EE 1.5 (or JEE 5 or whatever we're calling
> it these
> days)

JEE 5 is a huge cacophony of specifications. Can you be more specific
about which specs you would like to see finished first?

-dain

Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!

2006-03-28 Thread Dain Sundstrom


On Mar 28, 2006, at 12:50 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

2) Implementation of J2EE 1.5 (or JEE 5 or whatever we're calling  
it these

days)


JEE 5 is a huge cacophony of specifications. Can you be more specific  
about which specs you would like to see finished first?


-dain

Re: User Feedback Request -- this means you!

2006-03-28 Thread ian . d . stewart

Here are my top five, with the caveat that the order does not necessarily
reflect relative priority, just the order that I think of them:

1) Support for JDK1.5 (both for Geronimo itself and the Geronimo Eclipse
Plugin)
2) Implementation of J2EE 1.5 (or JEE 5 or whatever we're calling it these
days)
3) Migration path from Tomcat to Geronimo
4) More Documentation (HOWTO's, Tutorials, Cookbooks, etc)
5) And I'll go ahead and second David's #2, more frequent minor releases


Ian

It's better to be hated for who you are
than loved for who you are not

Ian D. Stewart
Appl Dev Analyst-Advisory, DCS Automation
JPMorganChase Global Technology Infrastructure
Phone: (614) 244-2564
Pager: (888) 260-0078



   
  David Blevins 
   
  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]To:   
user@geronimo.apache.org  
  si.com>  cc:  
   
       Subject:  User Feedback Request 
-- this means you!  
  03/28/2006 03:00  
   
  PM
   
  Please respond to 
   
  user  
   

   




So this is the first of what I think should be a quarterly event.
Geronimo is ultimately your project and we committers are but your
humble servants.  To serve you best, we need some critical high level
feedback to help us steer the project and focus on what matters most
to you!

Please, every user out there, give us your top 5 things we can do to
make Geronimo better for you.  Here is my list:

1)  More interaction with you guys, the users!
2)  More frequent releases incorporating more user feedback (small
releases more often vs. big releases only 4 times a year)
3)  Less deployment requirements (simpler plans, more defaults, etc.)
4)  More application validation at deployment
5)  More powerful text configuration

That's just to get the ball rolling.  More detail is always good if
you have the time.  In general anything you think we need to correct
as a community, technical or non-technical.  Let us know.

If you've ever uttered the words, "Geronimo would be such a great
project if it only" then now is your time to shine.

We want to hear from everyone!  This is not just for the "hard-core"
Geronimo users or J2EE experts.  If you are new to J2EE and
downloaded Geronimo and had to give up after an hour of no progress,
let us know what we might do!


It's all about you.


Best Regards,
David Blevins

User Feedback Request -- this means you!

2006-03-28 Thread David Blevins

So this is the first of what I think should be a quarterly event.   
Geronimo is ultimately your project and we committers are but your  
humble servants.  To serve you best, we need some critical high level  
feedback to help us steer the project and focus on what matters most  
to you!


Please, every user out there, give us your top 5 things we can do to  
make Geronimo better for you.  Here is my list:


1)  More interaction with you guys, the users!
2)  More frequent releases incorporating more user feedback (small  
releases more often vs. big releases only 4 times a year)

3)  Less deployment requirements (simpler plans, more defaults, etc.)
4)  More application validation at deployment
5)  More powerful text configuration

That's just to get the ball rolling.  More detail is always good if  
you have the time.  In general anything you think we need to correct  
as a community, technical or non-technical.  Let us know.


If you've ever uttered the words, "Geronimo would be such a great  
project if it only" then now is your time to shine.


We want to hear from everyone!  This is not just for the "hard-core"  
Geronimo users or J2EE experts.  If you are new to J2EE and  
downloaded Geronimo and had to give up after an hour of no progress,  
let us know what we might do!



It's all about you.


Best Regards,
David Blevins

44 matches

Mail list logo