Re: [VOTE] Release XBean 4.7 (take 2)

[Jay McHugh]

+1

On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 7:15 AM Jean-Louis MONTEIRO 
wrote:

> +1
>
> Le mar. 20 mars 2018 à 15:03, Mark Struberg  a écrit :
>
>> Thanks John, and also thanks for taking a very in depth look at even the
>> details!
>>
>> And here is my own
>>
>> +1
>>
>> as well.
>>
>> LieGrue,
>> strub
>>
>>
>> On Tuesday, 20 March 2018, 14:49:56 CET, John D. Ament <
>> johndam...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 6:11 PM Romain Manni-Bucau 
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> Le 19 mars 2018 20:20, "John D. Ament"  a écrit :
>>
>> The check in the build is that there's a NOTICE file available, and if
>> its there you should use that.
>>
>> Realistically what I would have done is replaced the NOTICE.vm from
>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/geronimo/xbean/trunk/xbean-asm6-shaded/src/main/appended-resources/META-INF/NOTICE.vm?revision=1764037=markup=1827162
>> 
>>  with
>> one that just includes empty strings.
>>
>> It's not correct to say this JAR includes software developed at the ASF,
>> nothing in there is developed here.
>>
>>
>> This is wrong John, check out the content of the jar.
>>
>> This is why the notice is generated this way and correctly.
>>
>>
>> You're right; its likely the best we can do in a notice, switching my
>> vote to +1
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> John
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 11:08 AM Mark Struberg  wrote:
>>
>> Yes, we eventually also like to fix the year "Apache XBean Copyright
>> 2005-2013"
>>
>> 2013 ;)
>>
>>
>> So +1 for the release
>>
>>
>> LieGrue,
>> strub
>>
>>
>>
>> On Monday, 19 March 2018, 16:02:11 CET, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> rmannibu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> well if that's the direction we take I'm tempted to say that: in both
>> cases we are perfectly legally fine
>> so we should just move forward the release if that's the only issue
>> found. Then once passed we should solve it in a dedicated thread.
>>
>> This means that it is not needed to mention this one anymore in the
>> context of this vote IMHO.
>>
>>
>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>>  | Old Blog
>>  | Github
>>  | LinkedIn
>>  | Book
>> 
>>
>> 2018-03-19 15:29 GMT+01:00 Mark Struberg :
>>
>> well, that's why we had the BSD in there! You see?
>>
>> And no, the current NOTICE is NOT wrong. The BSD-3clause, the ALv2 etc
>> allow to create a derivative work which is under another license. And this
>> is why we have
>>
>> "Apache XBean Copyright 2005-2013 The Apache Software Foundation"
>>
>> in the NOTICE file.
>>
>> But of course, by removing the BSD part from the NOTICE file this is now
>> totally off.
>> Note that the original legal ticket was created for a project which only
>> had a very few BSD classes. In our case the majority or work is BSD. Still
>> the summary derivative work (our shaded bundle) is ALv2.
>>
>> So my personal opinion is to revert back to the previous version of the
>> NOTICE!
>>
>> LieGrue,
>> strub
>>
>>
>>
>> On Monday, 19 March 2018, 15:11:23 CET, John D. Ament <
>> johndam...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>
>> -1
>> The NOTICE file in the JAR is now worse.  It indicates that the code was
>> developed at the ASF.
>>
>> IMHO, there should be no NOTICE file in the JAR.
>>
>> If the NOTICE file includes just
>>
>> Apache XBean :: ASM 6 shaded (repackaged)
>> Copyright 2005-2018 The Apache Software Foundation
>>
>> That should be enough.
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 10:01 AM Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> rmannibu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi!
>>
>> Please VOTE for the release of Apache XBean-4.7.
>>
>> Here is the staging repo: https://repository. apache.org/content/
>> repositories/ orgapachegeronimo-1053
>> 
>> The source distribution can be found here: https://repository.
>> apache.org/content/ repositories/ orgapachegeronimo-1053/org/
>> apache/xbean/xbean/4.7/xbean- 4.7-source-release.zip
>> 
>> sha1 is  c17fb38c503b0d0c0798b0fde9cf15 44d19681d0
>>
>> Change is only about upgrade asm to 6.1 (java 10) and fixing asm NOTICE
>> file.
>>
>> [+1] ship it
>> [-1] nope, stop because ${reason}
>>
>> The VOTE is open for 72h.
>>
>> Here is my +1.
>>
>>
>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>>  | Old Blog
>>  | Github
>>  | LinkedIn
>> 

Re: [VOTE] XBean 4.7 release

[Jay McHugh]

The notice file appears to have been introduced to deal with a deficiency
tracked as Jira issue XBEAN-283.

https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/XBEAN-283

My vote: +1

We can review the merits of that issue separately and if it turns out that
it is decided to be redundant to have the notice file - we can note it and
remove the file later.

I don't think that it is necessary to hold up the release for something
that has been unquestioned for nearly three years.

On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 1:00 PM Romain Manni-Bucau 
wrote:

>
>
> Le 14 mars 2018 18:51, "John D. Ament"  a écrit :
>
> ASF policy is that NOTICE files are present when the consumed product
> includes a NOTICE file.  In BSD-3-Clause products, the copyright statement
> (including download link) is in the license file.  So its enough to list it
> there.
>
> My vote: -1 due to incorrect NOTICE file.
>
>
> It is not incorrect since the license is particular it must be in notice
> to be able to put all parts together on user side. If you dont you let
> users do again this job which is insanely bad.
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 1:46 PM Romain Manni-Bucau 
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Le 14 mars 2018 18:30, "John D. Ament"  a écrit :
>>
>> Why does the NOTICE file in the resulting JAR (for the ASM shaded
>> dependency) include
>>
>> This product includes software developed at
>> OW2 Consortium (http://asm.ow2.org/)
>>
>> There is no notice file associated with ASM 6.1, so we should not need to
>> declare any notice.
>>
>>
>> Well it is not an asf licensed software nor an asf project so it is no
>> bad IMHO to list it here. Also their website look a bit outdated so I was
>> not sure it was that ok to completely drop it.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 12:54 PM Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> rmannibu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> yep, as written ;)
>>>
>>>
>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>>> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>>>  | Old Blog
>>>  | Github
>>>  | LinkedIn
>>>  | Book
>>> 
>>>
>>> 2018-03-14 17:51 GMT+01:00 Jean-Louis MONTEIRO :
>>>
 Romain,

 as far as I have seen, there is only the ASM upgrade, right?

 Le mer. 14 mars 2018 à 17:49, Romain Manni-Bucau 
 a écrit :

> Hi!
>
> Please VOTE for the release of Apache XBean-4.7.
>
> Here is the staging repo:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1049
> The source distribution can be found here:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1049/org/apache/xbean/xbean/4.7/xbean-4.7-source-release.zip
> sha1 is ea25f3fda5d9abea891a62abf738d1024f289dd5
>
> Change is only about upgrade asm to 6.1 (java 10).
>
> [+1] ship it
> [+0] meh, don’t care
> [-1] nope, stop because ${reason}
>
> The VOTE is open for 72h.
>
> Here is my +1.
>
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github
>  | LinkedIn
>  | Book
> 
>

>>>
>>
>

Re: Congratulations Romain for becoming the new Apache Geronimo PMC chair

[Jay McHugh]

Yes - Thank you Alan and congratulations Romain!

On Sun, Feb 25, 2018 at 4:39 AM Mark Struberg  wrote:

> Congratulations Romain and a bit thanks for stepping up and taking over
> all the paperwork for Apache Geronimo.
>
> I'd also like to say a big thanks to Alan Cabrera for being an excellent
> chair for the past few years!
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Welcome Christian Schneider as new Apache Geronimo Committer

[Jay McHugh]

Congratulations and welcome!

On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 4:28 AM Mark Struberg  wrote:

> Good morning!
>
> It's my pleasure to announce that Christian Schneider will join the Apache
> Geronimo team as new Committer!
>
> Christian is an expert in the OSGi area and already helped us with OSGi
> related questions since a long time.
> So it's finally time to make him officially part of the community!
>
> Welcome, Christian and thanks for your help!
>
> best regards,
> the Apache Geronimo team

Re: Active source location

[Jay McHugh]

Thanks Hendrik.

On Mon Feb 16 2015 at 5:06:12 AM Hendrik Dev hendrikde...@gmail.com wrote:

 primary repo is svn here: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/geronimo/

 As far as i know only parts are mirrored to github, like
 https://github.com/apache/geronimo-specs/tree/trunk
 https://github.com/apache/geronimo-javamail/tree/trunk
 ...

 On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 10:06 PM, Jay McHugh jaydmch...@gmail.com wrote:
  Hey all,
 
  I'm trying to figure out whether the best place to find the source code
 is
  github or subversion.
 
  Or, should the actually be in sync?
 
  Thanks,
 
  Jay



 --
 Hendrik Saly (salyh, hendrikdev22)
 @hendrikdev22
 PGP: 0x22D7F6EC

Active source location

[Jay McHugh]

Hey all,

I'm trying to figure out whether the best place to find the source code is
github or subversion.

Or, should the actually be in sync?

Thanks,

Jay

Re: [VOTE] Release geronimo-el_1.0_spec-1.0.2 (2nd try)

[Jay McHugh]

+1

Jay

2010/2/9 Delos dait...@gmail.com:
 Hi, I'd like to release v1.0.2 of the EL（Expression Language）1.0 Spec API.
 Ivan has run the signature testing and some el related testcases.

 Staging repo:
 https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-071/

 The svn location is here:
 https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/specs/tags/geronimo-el_1.0_spec-1.0.2/


 Vote will be open for 72 hours.

 [ ] +1  approve
 [ ] +0  no opinion
 [ ] -1  disapprove (and reason why)

 --
 Best Regards,

 Delos

Re: Fun with ears and osgi

[Jay McHugh]

Hello all,

This gets into a question that I have had about the OSGi-ification
goal of the server.

That is, how much are we trying to keep the internal architecture of
Geronimo hidden?  Are we looking to have a server that is able to
install any old Java EE apps and resources (that just happens to be
OSGi on the inside)?  Or, are we trying to build a server environment
where everyone 'knows' that it is OSGi and (if possible) builds their
applications taking that into account?

It seems like the direction we are going is the latter.

Am I seeing things correctly?

Jay

On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 9:25 AM, Lin Sun linsun@gmail.com wrote:
 Hi,

 I wonder if ear should continue working as what what they were working
 before and would not be installed as bundles in OSGi framework.  And
 if users want to leverage OSGi functions in ear, they would have to
 migrate their ear file to an Aries Application
 (http://incubator.apache.org/aries/applications.html).

 Lin

 On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 8:26 PM, David Jencks david_jen...@yahoo.com wrote:
 Working on the admin console I've run into the problem that ears most
 naturally translate into more than one osgi bundle -- at least one bundle
 for each web module, maybe one per module.

 Right now the deployment system is putting the wars inside the car file,
 just like in 2.2, but as bundles.  It looks like we are generating sort of
 reasonable metadata for the embedded bundles but there is certainly no way
 to access them.

 I can think of several approaches here:

 1. For now at least, just have one bundle per ear.  This is probably just a
 couple lines to change and should work for all reasonable apps.

 2. modify the pax mvn url handler so it can deal with bundles hidden inside
 bundles.  This has the advantage that an ear is still a single artifact but
 is otherwise slightly weird.

 3. modify geronimo to package the wars as entirely separate bundles from the
 main ear.  Maybe we can use the war module name as the classifier.

 In the interests of getting something working quickly I will probably try
 (1) first.  I'm intrigued by (2) but would certainly appreciate some
 discussion before I spend much time on either (2) or (3). and maybe
 someone has an even better idea.

 I assume there is a similar problem for app clients

 thanks
 david jencks

Re: Fun with ears and osgi

[Jay McHugh]

Thanks Rick,

That is exactly what I have been hoping the direction was.

I think things will be getting very exciting once the OSGi enterprise
specs are finalized and implemented (in Aries and otherwise).

Jay

On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 10:57 AM, Rick McGuire rick...@gmail.com wrote:
 Jay McHugh wrote:

 Hello all,

 This gets into a question that I have had about the OSGi-ification
 goal of the server.

 That is, how much are we trying to keep the internal architecture of
 Geronimo hidden?  Are we looking to have a server that is able to
 install any old Java EE apps and resources (that just happens to be
 OSGi on the inside)?  Or, are we trying to build a server environment
 where everyone 'knows' that it is OSGi and (if possible) builds their
 applications taking that into account?


 It is a little of both, actually.  JEE applications will still be JEE
 applications and (generally) unaware of all of the OSGi stuff going on
 underneath.  The underlying classloading model will be the OSGi one, and the
 server when it builds the configuration for a deployed application ensures
 that all of the OSGi import/exports get created so that the configuration
 functions.  This is not entirely different than what is done in prior
 releasesthe biggest difference is the underlying classloading model.

 At the same time, there's a desire to be able to host/deploy applications
 that actually are OSGi aware.  One of the end targets is to be able to host
 applications created for the Aries project runtime environment.  These
 applications will be using many of the same services used by JEE
 applications (JPA, JNDI, web containers, etc.) but accessing them in a
 loosely coupled, OSGi-centric manner.
 The work going on right now is first to get the underlying pieces of the
 server to be OSGi-based and using an OSGi classloading model.  David is
 currently looking at the second piece, which is how to take a legacy JEE
 application and create the plugin environment so that all of these
 applications will run unchanged in a JEE-certified environment.  The next
 step after this will be to create the Aries environment that will allow more
 OSGi-centric applications built using the Aries programming model to be
 deployed and managed.

 Rick

 It seems like the direction we are going is the latter.

 Am I seeing things correctly?

 Jay

 On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 9:25 AM, Lin Sun linsun@gmail.com wrote:


 Hi,

 I wonder if ear should continue working as what what they were working
 before and would not be installed as bundles in OSGi framework.  And
 if users want to leverage OSGi functions in ear, they would have to
 migrate their ear file to an Aries Application
 (http://incubator.apache.org/aries/applications.html).

 Lin

 On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 8:26 PM, David Jencks david_jen...@yahoo.com
 wrote:


 Working on the admin console I've run into the problem that ears most
 naturally translate into more than one osgi bundle -- at least one
 bundle
 for each web module, maybe one per module.

 Right now the deployment system is putting the wars inside the car file,
 just like in 2.2, but as bundles.  It looks like we are generating sort
 of
 reasonable metadata for the embedded bundles but there is certainly no
 way
 to access them.

 I can think of several approaches here:

 1. For now at least, just have one bundle per ear.  This is probably
 just a
 couple lines to change and should work for all reasonable apps.

 2. modify the pax mvn url handler so it can deal with bundles hidden
 inside
 bundles.  This has the advantage that an ear is still a single artifact
 but
 is otherwise slightly weird.

 3. modify geronimo to package the wars as entirely separate bundles from
 the
 main ear.  Maybe we can use the war module name as the classifier.

 In the interests of getting something working quickly I will probably
 try
 (1) first.  I'm intrigued by (2) but would certainly appreciate some
 discussion before I spend much time on either (2) or (3). and maybe
 someone has an even better idea.

 I assume there is a similar problem for app clients

 thanks
 david jencks

Re: [VOTE] release geronimo's forked mavenized tomcat 6.0.20.0 2nd try

[Jay McHugh]

+1

Jay

On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 8:56 PM, David Jencks david_jen...@yahoo.com wrote:
 I've removed the leftover archetype scripts, fixed up the pom names so the
 NOTICE files look nicer, added license goo to the script sources in the
 unreleased archetype, as well as a script to remove the goo, and tried
 again.  I think this answers all the problems Kevan and Joe found except
 getting my key in to the appropriate KEYS file.

 For various reasons we are now using a forked copy of tomcat derived from
 the tomcat 6.0.20 release, built with maven, with maven dependencies, etc
 etc.

 The code changes from tomcat 6.0.20 are:

 r814083 | djencks | 2009-09-11 16:36:16 -0700 (Fri, 11 Sep 2009) | 1 line

 GERONIMO-4566 port fix for
 tomcats https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47378
 
 r799220 | xuhaihong | 2009-07-30 02:53:30 -0700 (Thu, 30 Jul 2009) | 1 line

 GERONIMO-3451 Restricted listeners property file not found error logged
 during Tomcat server startup (Patch from Shawn Jiang)
 
 r790767 | kevan | 2009-07-02 17:09:12 -0700 (Thu, 02 Jul 2009) | 1 line

 GERONIMO-4685 Some customizations of Tomcat properties. Server info is now:
 Apache Geronimo (Embedded Tomcat). Will want to merge in the future.
 
 r790765 | kevan | 2009-07-02 17:06:02 -0700 (Thu, 02 Jul 2009) | 1 line

 GERONIMO-4685 Merge of 783305 from tomcat/tc6.0.x/trunk/. Fixes NPE in
 MapperListener.registerHost(). I would expect that this fix would be in
 6.0.22. So prolly won't require merging in the future
 
 r790742 | kevan | 2009-07-02 14:41:08 -0700 (Thu, 02 Jul 2009) | 1 line

 GERONIMO-4685 Merge of Tomcat patches from 6.0.18 to 6.0.20. This includes
 revision numbers 784303 and 784304. Does not include 787519, which should
 already be in 6.0.20
 
 r790359 | gawor | 2009-07-01 13:23:00 -0700 (Wed, 01 Jul 2009) | 1 line

 fill-in ServerInfo properties - but I can't add that to archetype as ant
 task will fail

 Staging repo:

 https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/geronimo-staging-035/
 site staged at:
 http://people.apache.org/~djencks/staging-site/maven/external/tomcat-parent-6.0.20/6.0.20.0/
 svn tag at:
 https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/external/tags/tomcat-parent-6.0.20.0
 The structure is a still little weird but I still don't really want to spend
 time fixing it up.


 [ ] +1 go for it
 [ ] 0
 [ ] -1 whoa, hold on a minute

 Vote open 72 hours

 thanks
 david jencks

Re: [VOTE] Geronimo Server 2.1.2 Release

[Jay McHugh]

+1

My production app deploys and works properly.

Jay

On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 9:52 PM, Joe Bohn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 All,

 I've prepared a release candidate of Geronimo Server 2.1.2 for your
 review and vote.

 The source for the Geronimo Server 2.1.2 release currently resides here:
 https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/server/branches/2.1.2

 When the release vote is approved, I will svn mv the code to
 https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/server/tags/2.1.2

 An archive of this source code can be found here:

 http://people.apache.org/~jbohn/geronimo-2.1.2-dist/geronimo-2.1.2-src.tar.gzhttp://people.apache.org/%7Ejbohn/geronimo-2.1.2-dist/geronimo-2.1.2-src.tar.gz
 OR
 http://people.apache.org/~jbohn/geronimo-2.1.2-dist/geronimo-2.1.2-src.ziphttp://people.apache.org/%7Ejbohn/geronimo-2.1.2-dist/geronimo-2.1.2-src.zip

 http://people.apache.org/~jbohn/geronimo-2.1.2-dist/http://people.apache.org/%7Ejbohn/geronimo-2.1.2-dist/contains
  the 10 Java EE, Minimal, and Framework server binary distributions
 to be
 released (framework, tomcat/jetty, Java EE/Minimal, tar/zip) as well as
 the RELEASE_NOTES, README, NOTICE, LICENSE, DISCLAIMER, and source code
 archives for the release.  These extra txt files were included so that they
 could be leveraged by GEP if necessary (they are also included in the
 assembly images).

 For your convenience, here are pointers to the urls for the
 distributions in zip format:

 http://people.apache.org/~jbohn/geronimo-2.1.2-dist/geronimo-jetty6-javaee5-2.1.2-bin.ziphttp://people.apache.org/%7Ejbohn/geronimo-2.1.2-dist/geronimo-jetty6-javaee5-2.1.2-bin.zip

 http://people.apache.org/~jbohn/geronimo-2.1.2-dist/geronimo-jetty6-minimal-2.1.2-bin.ziphttp://people.apache.org/%7Ejbohn/geronimo-2.1.2-dist/geronimo-jetty6-minimal-2.1.2-bin.zip

 http://people.apache.org/~jbohn/geronimo-2.1.2-dist/geronimo-tomcat6-javaee5-2.1.2-bin.ziphttp://people.apache.org/%7Ejbohn/geronimo-2.1.2-dist/geronimo-tomcat6-javaee5-2.1.2-bin.zip

 http://people.apache.org/~jbohn/geronimo-2.1.2-dist/geronimo-tomcat6-minimal-2.1.2-bin.ziphttp://people.apache.org/%7Ejbohn/geronimo-2.1.2-dist/geronimo-tomcat6-minimal-2.1.2-bin.zip

 http://people.apache.org/~jbohn/geronimo-2.1.2-dist/geronimo-framework-2.1.2-bin.ziphttp://people.apache.org/%7Ejbohn/geronimo-2.1.2-dist/geronimo-framework-2.1.2-bin.zip

 The maven artifacts for the release can be found here:
 http://people.apache.org/~jbohn/staging-repo/geronimo-2.1.2/http://people.apache.org/%7Ejbohn/staging-repo/geronimo-2.1.2/

 When the release vote is approved, these maven artifacts will be moved
 to the m2-ibiblio-rsync-repository at Apache.


 [ ] +1 Release Geronimo 2.1.2
 [ ] 0 No opinion
 [ ] -1 Do not release Geronimo 2.1.2 (please provide rationale)

 72 hours would expire at 11:00PM ET on Saturday evening, 8/2.  However, the
 vote may go longer while the tck results are verified.


 Joe Bohn

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Lin Sun is the newest member of the Geronimo PMC

[Jay McHugh]

Congratulations Lin!

Jay

On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 12:34 PM, Jarek Gawor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 All,

 Please join us in congratulating Lin Sun as the newest member of the
 Geronimo PMC. She has been involved with the Geronimo community for a
 long time and made great contributions as a committer and otherwise.
 She will be a great addition to the PMC.

 Congratulations Lin!

 The Apache Geronimo PMC

Re: Promoting GShell to a real subproject

[Jay McHugh]

+1

Jay

Guillaume Nodet [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: i think the subject is explicit.  
What do people think about that ?

-- 
Cheers,
Guillaume Nodet

Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/

TCK access

[Jay McHugh]

I should have all of the necessary paperwork filed for TCK access.

Could someone email me to let me know how to join the mailing list and IRC 
channel?

Or let me know if there is something else that I need to do.

I would like to be able to help out on the TCK testing, but my hands are kind 
of tied until I have access to the private stuff.

Thanks,

Jay

Question about plugin dependencies

[Jay McHugh]

Hi all,

I was wondering - is it possible to have a plugin that needs 'at least one of' 
or 'either of' some other plugin?

For example, it is possible to use dojo loaded from AOL's content delivery 
network.  So, if we made two versions of a Dojo plugin: One that has everything 
in it (the full Dojo WAR file and sources) and the other that only insert 
whatever would be necessary to use the CDN copy of Dojo.   Would it be possible 
to indicate that one or the other must be installed in order to use the JNDI 
viewer plugin?

I am thinking again about reducing footprint (and Dojo in particular though it 
could be relevant elsewhere).  So if someone had a situation where they knew 
that they would always be connected to the internet you could install the 
plugin that just pointed to the CDN but if they were not sure, then they could 
install the full local version of the plugin.

And I am also thinking about cases where the same functionality could be 
provided in two (or more) distinctly different ways (Tomcat and Jetty?).  If we 
could indicate that you have to have one or the other installed, but we didn't 
care which one then we could possibly reduce the number of plugins that we 
provide because we wouldn't need to specifically follow both paths with a 
'Tomcat' version and a 'Jetty' version.  There would just be a dependency that 
says you need one or the other.

Just some thoughts about how trunk's more pluggable design might make 
everyone's lives better and easier.

Jay

Re: svn commit: r588118 - /geronimo/server/trunk/pom.xml

[Jay McHugh]

Sorry Joe,

I just got back to my desk.

I'm glad that Donald got it changed over though.

Jay

Joe Bohn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jay,

This change causes the build to fail for me as it cannot find that 
version of the jspc-maven-plugin in a repo.  Can you revert this change?

Thanks,
Joe

[INFO] 

[ERROR] BUILD ERROR
[INFO] 

[INFO] Failed to resolve artifact.

GroupId: org.codehaus.mojo.jspc
ArtifactId: jspc-maven-plugin
Version: 2.0-alpha-1-20070806

Reason: Unable to download the artifact from any repository

   org.codehaus.mojo.jspc:jspc-maven-plugin:pom:2.0-alpha-1-20070806

from the specified remote repositories:
   central (http://repo1.maven.org/maven2),
   java.net (http://download.java.net/maven/1/),
   apache.snapshots (http://people.apache.org/repo/m2-snapshot-repository),
   apache-snapshots (http://people.apache.org/repo/m2-snapshot-repository),
   codehaus-snapshots (http://snapshots.repository.codehaus.org),
   apache-incubator 
(http://people.apache.org/repo/m2-incubating-repository/)




[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Author: jaydm
 Date: Wed Oct 24 20:01:28 2007
 New Revision: 588118
 
 URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=588118view=rev
 Log:
 Reverted the change of the jspc plugin version since
 it was made to correct a problem building on windows.
 
 Modified:
 geronimo/server/trunk/pom.xml
 
 Modified: geronimo/server/trunk/pom.xml
 URL: 
 http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/geronimo/server/trunk/pom.xml?rev=588118r1=588117r2=588118view=diff
 ==
 --- geronimo/server/trunk/pom.xml (original)
 +++ geronimo/server/trunk/pom.xml Wed Oct 24 20:01:28 2007
 @@ -1796,7 +1796,7 @@
  

  org.codehaus.mojo.jspc
  jspc-maven-plugin
 -2.0-alpha-1
 +2.0-alpha-1-20070806
  
  
  
 
 
 

Re: Interested in Contributing

[Jay McHugh]

Welcome Joseph,

If you see a Jira that you are interested in and it is not assigned - you can 
just email the list to let them know that you would like to work on it.

If you see one that is assigned but no recent work appears to have been done on 
it then you could email the list to ask whether or not it is being worked on 
and offer help.

I think that I would probably skip this particular Jira (someone else may 
disagree) only because there is very little (or no) active work being done on 
version 1. 

Versions 2.0.x and trunk (version 2.1.x) are where most of the attention is 
being placed.

Also, send in your Jira ID so that you can be set up to have Jiras assigned to 
you.

Jay

Joseph Leong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm really interested in contributing 
to this project, and i saw Jira GERONIMO-2251 was available.  Seems like a good 
one to get my feet wet.  I'm not too familiar with what the etiquette is in the 
geronimo community... is it free game for me to take a stab at it? 

Thanks,
Joseph Leong