Re: Samples for 2.1.2 - one final push
Joe, thanks for driving this! I think it is okay to remove those if we cannot find a better solution or just document that these are not expected to work in our documentation. I would be in favor of releasing samples too but we need to make sure the samples all work with at least one particular version G server (probably both 2.1.2 and 2.1.3). Some of the samples may not work yet like the javamail one? Lin On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 2:09 PM, Joe Bohn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Joe Bohn wrote: - Most of the samples when run include a Geronimo header with links that are supposed to take you to javadocs and xref for that sample. These don't work (and from what I see I'm not sure if they were ever fully functional). So these should probably be removed if I can't find a way to quickly implement them.
Re: Samples for 2.1.2 - one final push
Lin Sun wrote: Joe, thanks for driving this! I think it is okay to remove those if we cannot find a better solution or just document that these are not expected to work in our documentation. Right ... I've been playing with some things here. - Using a slightly modified version of what is checked in I can only get the xrefs doc included if I build the samples individually. If I attempt a top level build it just creates a whole lot of the xref and javadoc parts and leaves them littered throughout the src tree. It doesn't create the top level index to facilitate navigation. - I also have a lot of local changes to remove all the special reporting entries (and the copy of javadocs/xrefs into the wars too) in the hopes of getting creating a standard maven site using the defaults set in genesis. We could then publish this site. The exercise has been good because it exposed a number of other legal file issues that I've fixed locally. However, I'm still not able to generate a top level site. I'm trying to understand the mvn site generation better so that I can get this working. It probably makes sense to remove the xref and javadoc links from the sample UI anyway (or perhaps just direct them to one common maven site rather than include the specific content in the sample war). The links can't work for all of the samples anyway because some are just jsps with no java content (and hence there is no javadoc or xref generated). I would be in favor of releasing samples too but we need to make sure the samples all work with at least one particular version G server (probably both 2.1.2 and 2.1.3). Some of the samples may not work yet like the javamail one? I've verified all of the samples on both jetty tomcat on both 2.1.2 and 2.1.3. This includes the javamail and directory sample (which which I've really only validated on 2.1.3 because I was using the directory plugin which cannot be installed on 2.1.2). They all work. The biggest outstanding item after the site generation is getting the doc updated but we can create a release candidate and vote without the doc being complete. ... I've been dragging my feet on the doc (there's always something else to work on :-) ). Lin On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 2:09 PM, Joe Bohn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Joe Bohn wrote: - Most of the samples when run include a Geronimo header with links that are supposed to take you to javadocs and xref for that sample. These don't work (and from what I see I'm not sure if they were ever fully functional). So these should probably be removed if I can't find a way to quickly implement them.
Re: Samples for 2.1.2 - one final push
Oh yes .. and one more reason for publishing a regular site would be to conform better with other projects and avoid any special processing when using the maven release process. If we have to do something special to build the javadoc/xref into the samples then I'm not sure how that would get integrated into the maven release process. So, for now I'm trying to get mvn site (depending on the configuration from genesis as much as possible) to generate a usable site so samples can be treated like any other project when released. Joe Joe Bohn wrote: Lin Sun wrote: Joe, thanks for driving this! I think it is okay to remove those if we cannot find a better solution or just document that these are not expected to work in our documentation. Right ... I've been playing with some things here. - Using a slightly modified version of what is checked in I can only get the xrefs doc included if I build the samples individually. If I attempt a top level build it just creates a whole lot of the xref and javadoc parts and leaves them littered throughout the src tree. It doesn't create the top level index to facilitate navigation. - I also have a lot of local changes to remove all the special reporting entries (and the copy of javadocs/xrefs into the wars too) in the hopes of getting creating a standard maven site using the defaults set in genesis. We could then publish this site. The exercise has been good because it exposed a number of other legal file issues that I've fixed locally. However, I'm still not able to generate a top level site. I'm trying to understand the mvn site generation better so that I can get this working. It probably makes sense to remove the xref and javadoc links from the sample UI anyway (or perhaps just direct them to one common maven site rather than include the specific content in the sample war). The links can't work for all of the samples anyway because some are just jsps with no java content (and hence there is no javadoc or xref generated). I would be in favor of releasing samples too but we need to make sure the samples all work with at least one particular version G server (probably both 2.1.2 and 2.1.3). Some of the samples may not work yet like the javamail one? I've verified all of the samples on both jetty tomcat on both 2.1.2 and 2.1.3. This includes the javamail and directory sample (which which I've really only validated on 2.1.3 because I was using the directory plugin which cannot be installed on 2.1.2). They all work. The biggest outstanding item after the site generation is getting the doc updated but we can create a release candidate and vote without the doc being complete. ... I've been dragging my feet on the doc (there's always something else to work on :-) ). Lin On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 2:09 PM, Joe Bohn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Joe Bohn wrote: - Most of the samples when run include a Geronimo header with links that are supposed to take you to javadocs and xref for that sample. These don't work (and from what I see I'm not sure if they were ever fully functional). So these should probably be removed if I can't find a way to quickly implement them.
Re: Samples for 2.1.2 - one final push
Grrr every time I hope to get a samples image up for vote I discover (or rediscover) some issues that should be resolved. Here are the latest issues: - Most of the samples when run include a Geronimo header with links that are supposed to take you to javadocs and xref for that sample. These don't work (and from what I see I'm not sure if they were ever fully functional). So these should probably be removed if I can't find a way to quickly implement them. - There are still numerous dependency versions referenced throughout the sample poms. I think these need to be consolidated into a dependency management section in the top level pom or perhaps move our top level dependency from genesis to geronimo. Initially the versions were distributed so that samples could be built independently but we now require an initial top level build of samples. Joe Joe Bohn wrote: I think most of the work has been done to get samples to a state where they can be released. I plan to make one final push to get a release candidate ... hopefully within a week or less. The largest things remaining are: 1) Archetype - We need to decide what to do about this. I'm a bit torn. I think I might leave it in there but choose to not document it for now (unless some of the version references I had to include to make it work start to cause a problem when attempting to release using m-r-p). If nobody has any strong disagreement then I think we're done with discussing the archetype. 2) Doc - As much as I hate to do doc, I'm going to work my way through to ensure that there is some consistency in the samples doc and the old references to obsolete geronimo deployment plans are removed. This is a slow process (esp. if I'm the only one doing it) ... so I might push for a release vote before I have everything updated. Doc can continue to be worked after we release as we've been doing for server releases. 3) Revert to Genesis 1.4 if Genesis 1.5 is not released prior to the samples release. I'd like to have all of this wrapped up in a week or less and finally get a version of Samples out there (even if there are warts). Joe
Re: Samples for 2.1.2 - one final push
Joe Bohn wrote: Grrr every time I hope to get a samples image up for vote I discover (or rediscover) some issues that should be resolved. Here are the latest issues: - Most of the samples when run include a Geronimo header with links that are supposed to take you to javadocs and xref for that sample. These don't work (and from what I see I'm not sure if they were ever fully functional). So these should probably be removed if I can't find a way to quickly implement them. - There are still numerous dependency versions referenced throughout the sample poms. I think these need to be consolidated into a dependency management section in the top level pom or perhaps move our top level dependency from genesis to geronimo. Initially the versions were distributed so that samples could be built independently but we now require an initial top level build of samples. For this one I forgot that David (IIRC) had added a dependency management entry with scope of import for Geronimo 2.1.2 ... so it looks like all that is necessary is to remove the extraneous version references. :-) Joe Joe Bohn wrote: I think most of the work has been done to get samples to a state where they can be released. I plan to make one final push to get a release candidate ... hopefully within a week or less. The largest things remaining are: 1) Archetype - We need to decide what to do about this. I'm a bit torn. I think I might leave it in there but choose to not document it for now (unless some of the version references I had to include to make it work start to cause a problem when attempting to release using m-r-p). If nobody has any strong disagreement then I think we're done with discussing the archetype. 2) Doc - As much as I hate to do doc, I'm going to work my way through to ensure that there is some consistency in the samples doc and the old references to obsolete geronimo deployment plans are removed. This is a slow process (esp. if I'm the only one doing it) ... so I might push for a release vote before I have everything updated. Doc can continue to be worked after we release as we've been doing for server releases. 3) Revert to Genesis 1.4 if Genesis 1.5 is not released prior to the samples release. I'd like to have all of this wrapped up in a week or less and finally get a version of Samples out there (even if there are warts). Joe
Samples for 2.1.2 - one final push
I think most of the work has been done to get samples to a state where they can be released. I plan to make one final push to get a release candidate ... hopefully within a week or less. The largest things remaining are: 1) Archetype - We need to decide what to do about this. I'm a bit torn. I think I might leave it in there but choose to not document it for now (unless some of the version references I had to include to make it work start to cause a problem when attempting to release using m-r-p). If nobody has any strong disagreement then I think we're done with discussing the archetype. 2) Doc - As much as I hate to do doc, I'm going to work my way through to ensure that there is some consistency in the samples doc and the old references to obsolete geronimo deployment plans are removed. This is a slow process (esp. if I'm the only one doing it) ... so I might push for a release vote before I have everything updated. Doc can continue to be worked after we release as we've been doing for server releases. 3) Revert to Genesis 1.4 if Genesis 1.5 is not released prior to the samples release. I'd like to have all of this wrapped up in a week or less and finally get a version of Samples out there (even if there are warts). Joe
Re: Samples for 2.1.2 - one final push
In-line Joe Bohn wrote: I think most of the work has been done to get samples to a state where they can be released. I plan to make one final push to get a release candidate ... hopefully within a week or less. The largest things remaining are: 1) Archetype - We need to decide what to do about this. I'm a bit torn. I think I might leave it in there but choose to not document it for now (unless some of the version references I had to include to make it work start to cause a problem when attempting to release using m-r-p). If nobody has any strong disagreement then I think we're done with discussing the archetype. Agree to either leave it as-is and don't doc or move it to sandbox. 2) Doc - As much as I hate to do doc, I'm going to work my way through to ensure that there is some consistency in the samples doc and the old references to obsolete geronimo deployment plans are removed. This is a slow process (esp. if I'm the only one doing it) ... so I might push for a release vote before I have everything updated. Doc can continue to be worked after we release as we've been doing for server releases. Agree that docs can be finished after a release. 3) Revert to Genesis 1.4 if Genesis 1.5 is not released prior to the samples release. Agree, as 1.5-SNAPSHOT is only for not producing timestamped snapshot artifacts. I'd like to have all of this wrapped up in a week or less and finally get a version of Samples out there (even if there are warts). Sounds great! Joe
Samples for 2.1.2
We already decided to release samples for the upcoming Geronimo 2.1.2 server rather than attempting to release samples for Geronimo 2.1 and figure out how to make them work on 2.1.1 and 2.1.2. So, the next question is when should we release the samples for 2.1.2? My thoughts were to try to get these released a few weeks after our Geronimo 2.1.2 release. However, I've heard some comments that we should consider releasing the Samples for 2.1.2 concurrent with the server 2.1.2 release. This would most likely mean that we would have to delay our target for a 2.1.2 release beyond the end of the month. Regarding sample items that must be completed before we can release ... there are still a number of things ... general cleanup and validation, doc updates, verified functions, archetype, etc... There are also a few more decisions regarding how users would work with the samples that will influence how we structure things (more coming on that soon). You can find a more detailed list on this wiki page: http://cwiki.apache.org/GMOxPMGT/geronimo-samples-212-release-work-items.html Joe
Re: Samples for 2.1.2
I like the idea of releasing samples concurrently with the server, so that we don't give us an excuse to not get the samples out in time. I 'd like to see a good set of samples released so that whenever a user has a specific question when developing their apps, we have something to point to. For example the other day, someone on the user list wants to run apps per port, great we have a sample to point to! A few things we want to think about- 1. Identify the duplicate samples and decide what we need to do about them. I am looking closely at the few samples David Jencks has pointed out as duplicate. 2. Identify the relationship between samples and tutorials. I started to see quite a few tutorials out there in our wiki. I think some of them provides duplicate functionalities as the samples in the svn repo. For example, the tutorial has an example for container managed persistence with JPA (http://cwiki.apache.org/GMOxDOC21/container-managed-persistence-with-jpa.html) and we also have a similar sample on this - customer. The tutorial has an example for application managed persistence with JPA (http://cwiki.apache.org/GMOxDOC21/bean-managed-persistence-with-jpa.html) and we have 2 similar samples on this - bank and myphonebook. Personally, I'd like to see the code in svn (no matter if it is tutorial or sample) and delete the duplicate. Lin On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 10:32 AM, Joe Bohn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We already decided to release samples for the upcoming Geronimo 2.1.2 server rather than attempting to release samples for Geronimo 2.1 and figure out how to make them work on 2.1.1 and 2.1.2. So, the next question is when should we release the samples for 2.1.2? My thoughts were to try to get these released a few weeks after our Geronimo 2.1.2 release. However, I've heard some comments that we should consider releasing the Samples for 2.1.2 concurrent with the server 2.1.2 release. This would most likely mean that we would have to delay our target for a 2.1.2 release beyond the end of the month. Regarding sample items that must be completed before we can release ... there are still a number of things ... general cleanup and validation, doc updates, verified functions, archetype, etc... There are also a few more decisions regarding how users would work with the samples that will influence how we structure things (more coming on that soon). You can find a more detailed list on this wiki page: http://cwiki.apache.org/GMOxPMGT/geronimo-samples-212-release-work-items.html Joe
