Comments inline..
--- David Jencks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Apr 19, 2006, at 9:00 AM, anita kulshreshtha wrote:
>
> > David,
> > Thanks! More comments inline..
> >
> > --- David Jencks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> On Apr 19, 2006, at 6:51 AM, anita kulshreshtha wrote:
> >>
> >>> Thanks. What criteria has been used to set the
> >> geronimo.dependency
> >>> property in project.xml? The packaging of most configurations
> >> assumes
> >>> the packaged configuration will be loaded on top of j2ee-system
> >>> configuration. But the 'applications' configurations implicitly
> >> assume
> >>> that a full server, i.e jetty/tomcat is running. Is this correct?
> >>
> >> yes.
> >>> If
> >>> yes, Should we add these configurations (specified by
> >>> deploymnetConfig)
> >>> to the plans for documentation?
> >> no
> >>> Is this information stored in
> >>> config.ser and the deployer makes sure that these are already
> >> loaded?
> >> yes. The secret is in the defaultEnvironment attributes of the
> >> various builders, which add the necessary parents for each type of
> >> j2ee artifact. For instance the jetty builder adds jetty,
> connector
> >>
> >> builder adds connector, etc etc.
> > Ideally , if a user wanted to package a car for a simple
> > application like jsp-examples, he/she should not be required to
> know
> > all about the internal configuraitons? The user should be able to
> > include a single car as a dependency in pom.xml/project.xml for
> > standard servers like j2ee-*-server, web-jms-tomcat-server(?) etc.
>
> For simple apps the user should not have to include any explicit
> dependencies/imports at all: the deployers should figure out what is
>
> needed and add it for them. This is what the defaultEnvironment/
> defaultParentId is for, and as far as I know it works well.
Ah... I remember defaultParentId from TomcatModuleBuilder, it works
fine.
Do you
> know of any problems with this?
You are correct. I just tested that all the dependencies on
various cars are not needed in the project.xml. Should they be removed?
I hope nobody uses it as a sample. They will not be needed in M2
anyway.
One minor problem I haven't had time
>
> to fix is that the axis/ws dependencies are added to all web and ejb
>
> apps whether or not they are needed: they should be added by the web
>
> services builder, but there is currently no way to do this.
yep, it would be nice to have this in future..
Thanks
Anita
>
> thanks
> david jencks
>
> >
> > Thanks
> > Anita
> >
> > You can suppress these defaults in
> >>
> >> case you have special requirements by using the
> >> suppressDefaultEnvironment element in environment.
> >>
> >> In 1.0/1.2 this is not as well developed or consistent as in 1.1:
> the
> >>
> >> builders have attributes defaultParentId.
> >>
> >> thanks
> >> david jencks
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Thanks
> >>> Anita
> >>> --- David Jencks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Apr 17, 2006, at 6:45 AM, anita kulshreshtha wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> David,
> >>>>> Thanks! How is j2ee-system configuration started now?
> >>>>
> >>>> j2ee-system is the "root" configuration of the main geronimo
> >> server,
> >>>>
> >>>> and the config.ser file is actually in server.jar. The Daemon
> >>>> locates it in the classpath and starts it, see line 251.
> >>>
> >>> The naming is slightly confusing. The server.jar contains
> >>> j2ee-system configuraion and not j2ee-server.
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> thanks
> >>>> david jencks
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks
> >>>>> Anita
> >>>>>
> >>>>> --- David Jencks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Apr 16, 2006, at 9:20 AM, anita kulshreshtha wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> The j2ee-security configuration imports only rmi-naming
> >>>>>>> configuration. What about j2ee-server configuration?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I think calling the server side security config j2ee-security
> >>>> might
> >>>>>> be misleading; perhaps we should call it server-security. In
> >> any
> >>>>>> case, it doesn't need anything from j2ee-server, so it doesn't
> >>>> import
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> it.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> thanks
> >>>>>> david jencks
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Thanks
> >>>>>>> Anita
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> --- Dain Sundstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Apr 11, 2006, at 11:41 AM, Jacek Laskowski wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On 4/11/06, Dain Sundstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> In 1.1, I moved the corba system properties into a new
> >>>>>>>>>> SystemProperties GBean in the j2ee-corba plan.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Hi Dain,
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Will it be merged with trunk?If *I* wanted to merge it with
> >>>>>> trunk,
> >>>>>>>>> should I try to figure out the revision by taking a look at
> >>>>>>>> j2ee-corba
> >>>>>>>>> plan and commit these changes to trunk?
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> sure
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> -dain
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> __________________________________________________
> >>>>>>> Do You Yahoo!?
> >>>>>>> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection
> around
> >>>>>>> http://mail.yahoo.com
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> __________________________________________________
> >>>>> Do You Yahoo!?
> >>>>> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> >>>>> http://mail.yahoo.com
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> __________________________________________________
> >>> Do You Yahoo!?
> >>> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> >>> http://mail.yahoo.com
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> > http://mail.yahoo.com
>
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
