On 9/12/06, David Blevins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The heart of this debate is acting as an individual vs. a group.
It's fine to do either, but just know this; if you make your
decisions alone, don't be surprised if one day you are alone.
I like it! Very concise explanation. It should become
On Sep 1, 2006, at 4:38 PM, Jacek Laskowski wrote:
Would you share with us what your answers are?
It's taken me a while to get back to this, but I've been determined
to get you a response.
A plugin is synonymous with "application", so I don't think it make
sense to think territorially i
Jim Jagielski wrote:
> Are plugins specific to Geronimo and Geronimo alone?
> If so, then a sub-project might be a nice idea.
>
Yes...the plugins are specific to Geronimo.
> If not, however, then there is little compelling need
> to make G even more "bloated" with efforts than it is,
> and mak
Are plugins specific to Geronimo and Geronimo alone?
If so, then a sub-project might be a nice idea.
If not, however, then there is little compelling need
to make G even more "bloated" with efforts than it is,
and making it a self-contained project would be best.
Matt,
I guess, we should the leave the offer of a new Geronimo subproject
for plugins on the table. The bottom line is *IF* someone wants to
develop plugins here, then we can and should set it up at that time.
Until then it's status quo. It's not like we have not done this
plugins concept before.
I think this is what most people want. I can't speak for Aaron but I think he wants to build some
plugins that includes LGPL code. IIRC he felt that it was too much work for him to build and
maintain the two different sites and specifically said he was going to do it elsewhere for the
licensin
Just like we have a "Apache Geronimo Development Tools Subproject" why
can't we have a "Apache Geronimo Plugins Subproject"? and grant folks
working on plugins karma there if karma is the issue.
My 2 cents...Forking community is not good. We should try to encourage
people to work here especially
On 9/1/06, David Blevins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sep 1, 2006, at 8:27 AM, Jacek Laskowski wrote:
> Re: developers developing plugins - you're certainly right, we're not
> developing one monolithic codebase with all the features one could
> dream of. It's impossible and I understand why pe
On Sep 1, 2006, at 8:27 AM, Jacek Laskowski wrote:
Re: developers developing plugins - you're certainly right, we're not
developing one monolithic codebase with all the features one could
dream of. It's impossible and I understand why people could develop
their plugins outside. They simply don'
Aaron Mulder wrote:
> There are several issues here:
>
> 1) Do I think we were wrong to develop the JPA plugin outside
> Geronimo? No. We can argue about this as long as you like. Do Maven
> committers work on Mojo plugins? I'd be surprised if none of them
> did. Are you saying that nothing
On 9/1/06, Guillaume Nodet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Last, I think it' s unfair to tell that Aaron is not playing by the Geronimo
rules.
I am also developing a plugin for ServiceMix, and I don't think it should
be hosted in Geronimo, should I ? I think there is big decision to take,
and we sho
On 9/1/06, Aaron Mulder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
There are several issues here:
I knew you'd have helped me to sort out some issues. I did know!
Thanks Aaron for taking your precious time dealing with my comments. I
wish there were a way to buy you a beer or two for your careful
explanations.
I think that the plugin architecture is really powerfull and that all core featuresthat are part of J2EE should be available as plugins from Geronimo.For other plugins, I think a single open source community
"a la" mojo is the best way to go. It will encourage users to developopen source plugins a
There are several issues here:
1) Do I think we were wrong to develop the JPA plugin outside
Geronimo? No. We can argue about this as long as you like. Do Maven
committers work on Mojo plugins? I'd be surprised if none of them
did. Are you saying that nothing but server/* is RTC? ("I'd mere
On 9/1/06, Andrus Adamchik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sep 1, 2006, at 4:07 AM, Jacek Laskowski wrote:
...
> It's also disruptive to the community as they need to look it up in
> their notes where the plugin comes from rather than download it from a
> Geronimo space. More troublesome. Anothe
On Sep 1, 2006, at 4:07 AM, Jacek Laskowski wrote:
Also, recall that the main point of plugins is to facilitate the
development of value-added features outside the Geronimo community.
There's little point to creating a plugin architecture and then
insisting that everyone working on plugins do s
On 9/1/06, Aaron Mulder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The main developers who produced the plugin were not Geronimo
committers, and I had the space available.
You still have here, in the Geronimo repo. You're a Geronimo committer
and you can get as much "as you wish"[*] No need to go outside in t
On 8/31/06, Jacek Laskowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Aaron and Andrus,
The patch caught my attention and got me thinking about the plugin and
where it's being developed.
The first time I read it I thought why Andrus was asking that question
here (yet complaining about SF issue tracker) sin
On 8/31/06, Andrus Adamchik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Aaron,
finally got time to start poking around JPA plugin. I can compile it
now, but it requires a patch below to build against the latest JPA
spec. Not a big fan of SF issue tracker, so I simply put it on the web:
http://people.apache.o
Just installed the following pieces from G 1.1 download:
geronimo/geronimo-gbean-deployer/1.1/geronimo-gbean-deployer-1.1.car
geronimo/geronimo-system/1.1/geronimo-system-1.1.jar
geronimo/geronimo-deployment/1.1/geronimo-deployment-1.1.jar
geronimo/geronimo-management/1.1/geronimo-management-1.1.
You need to manually install the Geronimo 1.1 CARs into your local M2
repo. Unfortunately, the only way to do this is to build the Geronimo
1.1 tag from source or to create them by JARring up the right
directories in a Geronimo 1.1 installation. Matt Hogstrom has a todo
to put all the Geronimo 1
This one (which to the best of my knowledge corresponds to the final
release of the spec)
http://people.apache.org/repo/m2-snapshot-repository/org/apache/
geronimo/specs/geronimo-jpa_3.0_spec/1.0-SNAPSHOT/
BTW, are you able to build a functioning plugin? I am getting stuck
here:
# cd pl
OK, but which JPA spec JAR are you using? I want to make sure I'm
building against "the latest".
Thanks,
Aaron
On 8/31/06, Andrus Adamchik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Aaron,
finally got time to start poking around JPA plugin. I can compile it
now, but it requires a patch below to build
Hi Aaron,
finally got time to start poking around JPA plugin. I can compile it
now, but it requires a patch below to build against the latest JPA
spec. Not a big fan of SF issue tracker, so I simply put it on the web:
http://people.apache.org/~aadamchik/jpa-plugin-patch.txt
Andrus
24 matches
Mail list logo
