Adriano-- Yeah, the Maven work Adam has done is a great step forward; I don't think we'll get it in for 1.0 (sorry, Adam!). But, shortly after 1.0 goes out, we'll figure out a way to distribute Maven support and will be looking for help to get it integrated into the next Beehive release (1.1, presumably).
It is a pity that Pollinate has kind of stagnated right now.....we'll see how the Beehive tooling story evolves. Yes, I __certainly__ hope that Beehive 1.0 can be out this week...I think we're all anxious to get an official, final release out. :) Eddie On 9/11/05, Glauber Adriano Reis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm happy now, the layout makes its way smothly into NetBeans when you import > it as an > external web project. > I've got 3 questions: > 1 - would maven-ized samples be bundled with V1? If so, I read in the mailing > list > about the plugin(I was working on such a thing as well but stoped since it had > been already developed) but I cannot find the plugin or anything mentioning > it in JIRA. > > 2 - Such a pity that Pollinate project is dead. What you guys think? ...the > latest > NeBeans version to be released (v5) will have struts support. I think it > would be cool > having some sort of minimal beehive support as well, I'd be very glad working > on it (since I probably > wont use WebLogic 9 eclipse plugins) but want you opinion. > > 3 - Is Beehive V1 due out this week? I'm pretty much anxious... :) > > > Glauber Adriano > > > > > Eddie O'Neil wrote: > > All-- > > > > I've got a patch ready which will reorganize the > > <dist-root>/samples/netui-blank web project from a source-in model > > like: > > > > fooWeb/ > > Controller.java > > index.jsp > > WEB-INF/ > > web.xml > > src/ > > build.xml > > build.properties > > Foo.java > > > > to a source-peer model like: > > > > fooWeb/ > > build.xml > > build.properties > > src/ > > Foo.java > > web/ > > index.jsp > > Controller.java > > WEB-INF/ > > web.xml > > > > This brings the OOTB NetUI project model in-line with that prescribed > > by Tomcat and used in many projects. It's also what Adriano suggested > > and used for his NetBeans project. > > > > We're getting in the last days before 1.0 here, so we need to do two > > things: > > > > 1) agree that this is the right thing to do > > 2) review the patch in this bug -- > > http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEEHIVE-921 > > > > Please do both; if you disagree with (1), say so! :) > > > > Once / if we agree on this, I'll commit it and take a couple of hours > > to rework some documentation. And, hopefully we can branch and ship > > 1.0. :) > > > > Eddie > > > > > > > > On 9/9/05, Rich Feit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >>Sounds great! Leaving netui-samples and netui-jsf seems like the right > >>thing to hold off for 1.1. > >> > >>Eddie O'Neil wrote: > >> > >> > >>> Awesome. I'll make this change for netui-blank but will leave > >>>netui-jsf and netui-samples for the sake of stability. We can fix > >>>those for Beehive 1.1. > >>> > >>> This would switch the default NetUI project model to something that > >>>looks like this: > >>> > >>> http://jakarta.apache.org/tomcat/tomcat-5.0-doc/appdev/source.html > >>> > >>>which is basically: > >>> > >>> fooWebProject/ > >>> web/ > >>> src/ > >>> build.xml > >>> build.properties > >>> > >>>with a build that works like samples/petstoreWeb. > >>> > >>> Any other thoughts about doing this? > >>> > >>>Eddie > >>> > >>> > >>>On 9/9/05, Rich Feit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>>I definitely agree on #2 (if I'm understanding you correctly) -- I think > >>>>it should support the Tomcat model you're describing. Originally I'd > >>>>suggested supporting both because netui-blank is in the old project > >>>>model, so I assumed that this is the only one we would be supporting. > >>>>So I support making this change... > >>>> > >>>>Rich > >>>> > >>>>Eddie O'Neil wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>1) yes, this simply adds a convenience target to beehive-imports.xml. > >>>>>It doesn't attempt to fix the validation problem discussed earlier -- > >>>>>depending on how it's fixed, that might be an SVN-side issue with > >>>>>building the distribution. > >>>>> > >>>>>2) I agree that we are moving away from the WEB-INF/src project model > >>>>>and onto the Tomcat model where web/ and src/ are peers. This target > >>>>>certainly could support both models, but it's just easier to have it > >>>>>support the one Tomcat prescribes that is widely used and is easily > >>>>>supported in various IDEs. We can document how to setup a project > >>>>>with source-in-webapp. If there was enough interest, we could make > >>>>>this change now...it only affects netui-samples, netui-blank, and > >>>>>netui-jsf. > >>>>> > >>>>> Thoughts? > >>>>> > >>>>>Eddie > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>Rich Feit wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>I see - so this isn't the complex part of the change we were talking > >>>>>>about. This is simply adding an ant target to beehive-imports.xml. It > >>>>>>seems like a good addition, but one question I have is whether we should > >>>>>>be supporting different project models with something like this. Seems > >>>>>>like we're moving away from a source-under-web-content model. What do > >>>>>>you think? > >>>>>>Rich > >>>>>> > >>>>>>Eddie O'Neil wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>Here's the Ant that will do this; it patches > >>>>>>>trunk/user/beehive-imports.xml and can be run as: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> $> ant -f beehive-imports.xml new.netui.webapp > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>which will prompt for a destination directory for the project. Or, it > >>>>>>>can be run like: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> $> ant -f beehive-imports.xml new.netui.webapp -Dwebapp.dir > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>which will skp the prompt since "webapp.dir" has already been provided. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>I think this will be *really* useful and less error-prone than the > >>>>>>>alternative. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>Thoughts? > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>Eddie > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>><snip> > >>>>>>> <target name="new.netui.webapp" description="Create > >>>>>>>a new NetUI-enabled Beehive webapp"> > >>>>>>> <input message="Provide a fully-qualified web project path:" > >>>>>>> addproperty="webapp.dir"/> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> <copy todir="${webapp.dir}"> > >>>>>>> <fileset dir="${basedir}/samples/netui-blank"> > >>>>>>> <include name="**/*"/> > >>>>>>> </fileset> > >>>>>>> </copy> > >>>>>>> <deploy-netui webappDir="${webapp.dir}"/> > >>>>>>> <echo>Created a NetUI-enabled in ${webapp.dir}</echo> > >>>>>>> </target> > >>>>>>></snip> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>On 9/9/05, Eddie O'Neil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>Gotcha. As far as the docs, I've got a placeholder in the > >>>>>>>>netui/projects.xml doc already that describes the cp / ant -f step. > >>>>>>>>So, that part is easy. ;) > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>Patch forthcoming... > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>Eddie > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>On 9/9/05, Rich Feit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>Oh, I just meant we should take a week to have people play with it > >>>>>>>>>if we > >>>>>>>>>put it in for 1.0, that's all. I think we'd want to get it into the > >>>>>>>>>docs, too, especially where there are instructions for copying > >>>>>>>>>netui-blank, etc. What do you think about that? > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>I'd definitely take a look at the diff, though, even if it's > >>>>>>>>>something > >>>>>>>>>we hold until v1.1. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>Rich > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>Eddie O'Neil wrote: > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>Yeah -- I don't think it would take a week (probably just a couple > >>>>>>>>>>of hours), but it's a little different than how we do things > >>>>>>>>>>right now > >>>>>>>>>>because we need to support two scenarios: > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>- create a new webapp > >>>>>>>>>>- inject the runtime files (JARs / resources) into the samples > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>We've got the latter and could easily add the former. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>But, we'll get very little test mileage on it in the near term. I > >>>>>>>>>>can take a crack at it and see what you think of the diff... > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>Eddie > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>On 9/9/05, Rich Feit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>Definitely, this would be a great thing to have. I have a local > >>>>>>>>>>>script > >>>>>>>>>>>that does exactly this -- in retrospect, this should have made > >>>>>>>>>>>me think > >>>>>>>>>>>of an ant target. I think it's something that we should do for > >>>>>>>>>>>1.1, > >>>>>>>>>>>unless we want to delay the release for a week or so... > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>Rich > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>Eddie O'Neil wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>It's complicated. :) > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>We really need a target that can "seed" a Beehive webapp including > >>>>>>>>>>>>all of the validation config files, runtime JARs, and NetUI URL > >>>>>>>>>>>>addressable resources. Today, this is done using a command like: > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>cp -rf samples/netui-blank <project-dir> > >>>>>>>>>>>>ant -f ant/beehive-runtime.xml deploy.beehive.webapp.runtime > >>>>>>>>>>>>-Dwebapp.dir=<project-dir> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>If, for example, you just do the latter, you'll end up with a > >>>>>>>>>>>>webapp > >>>>>>>>>>>>that has the runtime but no web.xml or validation config > >>>>>>>>>>>>files. And, > >>>>>>>>>>>>that's kind of bad... > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>Would be *very* nice to have a target that just does: > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>ant -f beehive-imports.xml new.beehive.webapp -Dproject.dir=... > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>It could even prompt for the project.dir -- kind of like a new > >>>>>>>>>>>>project > >>>>>>>>>>>>wizard in Ant. > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>We could do this for 1.0, but it's not an insignificant change. > >>>>>>>>>>>>It's *definitely* something we need for 1.1... > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>Eddie > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>On 9/9/05, Rich Feit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>Yeah, if it's complicated at all, I agree. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>Daryl Olander wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>+1 to doing the real fix post 1.0 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>On 9/9/05, Eddie O'Neil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>I take it back...this isn't a straightforward thing to fix > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>unfortunately because it affects the Ant used to provide the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>runtime > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>in both the distribution and SVN builds. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>It wouldn't be hard to change it, but if we're going to do > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>that, we > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>should add the beehive-netui-validator-config.xml file (and > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>consider > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>adding web.xml) to those as well... > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>I agree (now) having them checked in is the right thing > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>unless we > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>want to tackle the bigger problem of copying all of the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>config files. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>And, I'd rather ship 1.0 and fix that later. :) > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Eddie > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On 9/9/05, Rich Feit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>OK, I certainly don't have an objection to that... thanks. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Rich > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Eddie O'Neil wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Right, it doesn't *have* to happen now, but doing it now > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>ensures > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>that we're consistent. So, I'm going to go ahead and fix > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>while you're > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>getting the compiler change in. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>:) > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Eddie > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Rich Feit wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>I haven't started it -- it doesn't seem like anything > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>that has to go > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>into v1, right? Just checking. I did update the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>checked-in files to > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>be > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>of the right version -- this is just the longer-term fix > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>to ensure > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>that > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>this doesn't happen again... :) > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Rich > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Eddie O'Neil wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Rich-- > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Have you started fixing BEEHIVE-914 yet? If not, let me > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>know and > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>I'll take that one. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Eddie > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>> > >>> > > > >
