Hi, Joe, thanks for starting the thread. I'd vote for No. 3. I envision for any future maintenance release of 2.1, such as 2.1.3, we can just release a sample compatibility plugin, if there is no other changes required.
I think No. 3 will make things manageable (we test samples with one release instead of 3 releases) and make sure we have a good sample solution to our user. I think users will be more frustrated if they find out samples not working on a particular release when we say we support them. If users want to use the samples, they need to download G server 2.1.2, otherwise unexpected behavior can happen. Isn't this same as if you want to use our GEP, you need to be on a particular version of eclipse and JDK? Lin On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 2:47 PM, Joe Bohn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > We've been going back and forth on samples now for some time. There are > multiple reasons why the samples are not yet released -- but one of them has > to do with compatibility for the 2.1.x releases. > > Up until now I've been assuming that we would release samples for 2.1 for > the sake of completeness and ensure that we can get those same samples > working on 2.1.1 and 2.1.2+. If it wasn't possible to get the same samples > working on higher releases then I figured we would release 2.1.1 and 2.1.2+ > versions of the samples. Now, I'm starting to wonder if it is worth the > effort to release samples for anything other than 2.1.2. > > Here are the facts: > - We can add artifact-alias entries to get 2.1 samples working on a 2.1.2 > server or even a 2.2 server. > - A fix was required for the alias processing which was not included in > 2.1.1. Therefore, if we release samples for 2.1 we will not be able to run > them on 2.1.1 - but we could run them on 2.1.2 (when released). That seems > like a strange scenario - 2.1 ok, 2.1.2 no, 2.1.2 ok. If we release 2.1.1 > samples in addition to 2.1 then which of those do we point users to leverage > on 2.1.2? IMO it would be clearer to say we support 2.1.2+. > - Is there a strong need for samples on older releases or are they primarily > of value on the latest release? As Lin pointed out to me, users looking at > samples will most likely be working with our latest release. If we release > samples for 2.1/2.1.1 will anybody actually use them (assuming we release > 2.1.2 and follow that up quickly with the samples for 2.1.2)? > > So these are the obvious choices: > 1) Release samples for 2.1. Release another version of samples for 2.1.1. > Then either release samples for 2.1.2 or include alias entries in the 2.1.2 > server so that the 2.1/2.1.1 samples will work on 2.1.2. > OR > 2) Release samples for 2.1. Skip 2.1.1. Add artifact aliases to support > the 2.1 samples on 2.1.2 and document that we don't support samples on > 2.1.1. > OR > 3) Release samples for 2.1.2 and then address any future 2.1.x releases with > artifact aliases. Point users that want to leverage samples to do so on > 2.1.2+ and document that we don't support samples on 2.1 or 2.1.1. > > There are a few potential issues with option #3: > - The ldap sample requires directory server to be installed on G or the use > of an external LDAP server. The recommended approach for the installed > directory server is to install the Directory plugin. However, this plugin > is currently only released for a G 2.1 server. We would need to either > release a new version of the Directory plugin or do the compatibility trick > with aliases again for 2.1.2. > - The 2.1 & 2.1.1 welcome page references to the jsp, servlet, and > ldap-sample examples will never work. Actually, they won't work even if we > release 2.1 & 2.1.1 samples unless we want to change the groupid/module > names of these samples back to the original names prior to a release of them > (which I doubt we would want to do). > > Any other issues, recommendations, or thoughts? > > Joe >
