Re: Make "framework" build the entire framework server
I did the basic reorganization in rev 746112. We probably want to change some groupIds if everyone is OK with the change. On Feb 18, 2009, at 4:46 AM, Jason Dillon wrote: On Feb 18, 2009, at 7:15 AM, David Jencks wrote: On Feb 17, 2009, at 12:14 PM, Donald Woods wrote: Sounds worth the time to try it out. Two requests: 1) If this works, we publish the framework assembly instead of the two minimal assemblies to the Download page for 2.2, as this would allow users to build their own custom minimal server assembly (and of course some docs telling users how to create the old minimal assembly from this new framework assembly.) I'm neutral or slightly +0.1 on this idea. I don't actually see how it relates to my proposal but if everyone agrees I'm fine with this idea. Less = more IMO, so I'm +1 I guess this should be a separate vote... 2) If time permits, can we move or duplicate relevant testsuite modules into a new testsuite dir under either the framework dir or a new framework-testsuite dir, so that we can verify the basic framework cmdline scripts and installing plugins (like Jetty/ Tomcat to make an equivalent minimal assembly)? I like this idea. For a few months now when I work on a plugin set (mconsole, activemq) I've included a custom server aseembly in the plugin group and added at least one integration test. This has really helped speed up feature development. IIUC you are proposing doing the same for framework. Sure, +1 I haven't done this yet. I don't think we have any integration tests that run on framework yet. I'll probably come up with some simple ones soon. thanks david jencks --jason
Re: Make "framework" build the entire framework server
On Feb 18, 2009, at 7:15 AM, David Jencks wrote: On Feb 17, 2009, at 12:14 PM, Donald Woods wrote: Sounds worth the time to try it out. Two requests: 1) If this works, we publish the framework assembly instead of the two minimal assemblies to the Download page for 2.2, as this would allow users to build their own custom minimal server assembly (and of course some docs telling users how to create the old minimal assembly from this new framework assembly.) I'm neutral or slightly +0.1 on this idea. I don't actually see how it relates to my proposal but if everyone agrees I'm fine with this idea. Less = more IMO, so I'm +1 2) If time permits, can we move or duplicate relevant testsuite modules into a new testsuite dir under either the framework dir or a new framework-testsuite dir, so that we can verify the basic framework cmdline scripts and installing plugins (like Jetty/Tomcat to make an equivalent minimal assembly)? I like this idea. For a few months now when I work on a plugin set (mconsole, activemq) I've included a custom server aseembly in the plugin group and added at least one integration test. This has really helped speed up feature development. IIUC you are proposing doing the same for framework. Sure, +1 --jason
Re: Make "framework" build the entire framework server
On Feb 17, 2009, at 12:14 PM, Donald Woods wrote: Sounds worth the time to try it out. Two requests: 1) If this works, we publish the framework assembly instead of the two minimal assemblies to the Download page for 2.2, as this would allow users to build their own custom minimal server assembly (and of course some docs telling users how to create the old minimal assembly from this new framework assembly.) I'm neutral or slightly +0.1 on this idea. I don't actually see how it relates to my proposal but if everyone agrees I'm fine with this idea. 2) If time permits, can we move or duplicate relevant testsuite modules into a new testsuite dir under either the framework dir or a new framework-testsuite dir, so that we can verify the basic framework cmdline scripts and installing plugins (like Jetty/Tomcat to make an equivalent minimal assembly)? I like this idea. For a few months now when I work on a plugin set (mconsole, activemq) I've included a custom server aseembly in the plugin group and added at least one integration test. This has really helped speed up feature development. IIUC you are proposing doing the same for framework. thanks david jencks -Donald David Jencks wrote: I'd like to play around with trying to make gbeans less restrictive and possibly some classloading ideas. This would be a lot easier if I had a smaller project to deal with. So, I'd like to make it so that framework is self contained and builds the entire framework server. I haven't looked at this too closely recently but I think it involves: moving all or part of buildsupport into framework (at least car- maven-plugin) moving the framework plugingroup into framework moving the boilerplate and framework assemblies into framework. I suggested this a few months back (sept 23 2008) and there were some objections I didn't fully understand. Right now I'm sure this would make my day to day development life a lot easier so if there are objections I'd really appreciate knowing how specifically this would make your day to day development life harder. thanks david jencks
Re: Make "framework" build the entire framework server
Sounds worth the time to try it out. Two requests: 1) If this works, we publish the framework assembly instead of the two minimal assemblies to the Download page for 2.2, as this would allow users to build their own custom minimal server assembly (and of course some docs telling users how to create the old minimal assembly from this new framework assembly.) 2) If time permits, can we move or duplicate relevant testsuite modules into a new testsuite dir under either the framework dir or a new framework-testsuite dir, so that we can verify the basic framework cmdline scripts and installing plugins (like Jetty/Tomcat to make an equivalent minimal assembly)? -Donald David Jencks wrote: I'd like to play around with trying to make gbeans less restrictive and possibly some classloading ideas. This would be a lot easier if I had a smaller project to deal with. So, I'd like to make it so that framework is self contained and builds the entire framework server. I haven't looked at this too closely recently but I think it involves: moving all or part of buildsupport into framework (at least car-maven-plugin) moving the framework plugingroup into framework moving the boilerplate and framework assemblies into framework. I suggested this a few months back (sept 23 2008) and there were some objections I didn't fully understand. Right now I'm sure this would make my day to day development life a lot easier so if there are objections I'd really appreciate knowing how specifically this would make your day to day development life harder. thanks david jencks
Make "framework" build the entire framework server
I'd like to play around with trying to make gbeans less restrictive and possibly some classloading ideas. This would be a lot easier if I had a smaller project to deal with. So, I'd like to make it so that framework is self contained and builds the entire framework server. I haven't looked at this too closely recently but I think it involves: moving all or part of buildsupport into framework (at least car-maven- plugin) moving the framework plugingroup into framework moving the boilerplate and framework assemblies into framework. I suggested this a few months back (sept 23 2008) and there were some objections I didn't fully understand. Right now I'm sure this would make my day to day development life a lot easier so if there are objections I'd really appreciate knowing how specifically this would make your day to day development life harder. thanks david jencks
