--- "Geir Magnusson Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Oct 5, 2005, at 11:29 AM, Joe Bohn wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> >
> >> On Oct 5, 2005, at 11:01 AM, Joe Bohn wrote:
> >>
> >>> I think there's two different types of problems
> here that are
> >>> being confused.
> >>>
> >>> The first is a few configuration issues with the
> zip image that
> >>> Stefan (in the tomcat config.xml) and Matt (with
> the TranQL and
> >>> DB2) have discovered. There may be more of
> these but these
> >>> types of issues that arise but they are *not*
> issues which 100%
> >>> of customers will hit. For these types of
> problems I think that
> >>> an errata on the download page should suffice
> (with individual
> >>> replacement modules and directions).
In geronimo-1.0-M5.zip I see a config.xml.bak!
This issue will not affect anyone one.
Thanks
Anita
> >>>
> >>> The second is another issue that Stefan
> discovered which
> >>> involves the installer. This is the type of
> thing that can
> >>> affect a lot of users and may be something that
> would cause us
> >>> to create an M6. However, since the installer
> is itself a
> >>> unique download do we really have to build
> another M6 to replace
> >>> it? Can't we just build a new installer off
> the M5 image with
> >>> changes to the installer alone that should not
> affect the TCK
> >>> results? If possible I think this would be a
> better solution
> >>> than dropping it completely from M5.
> >>>
> >> I don't think we're advocating dropping it - just
> redoing it...
> >>
> >
> > I meant potentially dropping it from M5 (as Kevan
> alluded to) ...
> > not from history. :-)
> >
> >
> >>>
> >>> Another idea would be to just add some very "in
> your face"
> >>> statements around the download link for the
> installer itself.
> >>> Does Apache regulate what you can and cannot
> include on the
> >>> download page?
> >>>
> >>>
> >> The geronimo download page is governed by the
> project. How "in
> >> your face" are you thinking here?
> >> Probably don't want "If you use this, your
> (@[EMAIL PROTECTED]@-ed, and if you
> >> don't like it, you can go *(@[EMAIL PROTECTED]@!#)[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
> >> :D
> >>
> >
> > I wasn't thinking that kind of "in your face" :-)
> Rather,
> > something along the lines of:
> > %link% this is an executable JAR, so install it
> using java -jar
> > geronimo-1.0-M5-installer.jar.
> > WARNING: If no selections are made in the
> installation both
> > containers will be included with common
> (colliding) port numbers.
> > It is recommended that you choose either
> Tomcat-only, Jetty-only,
> > or explicitly specify the ports for each
> container.
>
> Sure! That's easy. But isn't there another problem
> w/ the
> installer? Can we put the additional errata there?
>
> geir
>
> >
> >
> >> geir
> >>
> >>> Joe
> >>>
> >>> Kevan Miller wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> Without a really big disclaimer on the download
> page, my guess
> >>>> is that approximately 100% of new-to-Geronimo
> M5 Installer
> >>>> users will run into this problem. All you have
> to do is keep
> >>>> hitting "Next". I did. I just never started my
> "installed"
> >>>> server, because I'd already tested the
> zipped/tarred version of
> >>>> code (my mistake).
> >>>> I don't think an errata is sufficient and I
> don't see how we
> >>>> can ignore such a visible issue. This may be a
> bit heretical,
> >>>> but one option is not to release the
> installer. Although this
> >>>> is a server issue, you don't hit this problem
> in normal usage
> >>>> when running from an zip/tar "install" (at
> least I haven't run
> >>>> into any other problems, am I missing
> something?).
> >>>> Most first-time users will choose the install
> download thinking
> >>>> they're making their lives easier, when
> actually, they've just
> >>>> made their lives more difficult. Although some
> last-minute hard
> >>>> work went into the installer, IMO, the M5
> installer is of
> >>>> limited value for first-time Geronimo users. I
> also think that
> >>>> the current installer is actually a
> configuration utility in
> >>>> disguise -- we should start separating
> concerns...
> >>>> BTW, I assume that actually fixing the
> underlying problem means
> >>>> rerunning the TCK tests? Thus the reticence for
> fixing?
> >>>> --kevan
> >>>> On 10/5/05, *Geir Magnusson Jr.*
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>>> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
> >>>> On Oct 5, 2005, at 8:30 AM, Matt Hogstrom
> wrote:
> >>>> > I think that will work but users won't
> find Geronimo
> >>>> incredibly
> >>>> > useful if they have to pull a whole new
> build to fix a
> >>>> single
> >>>> problem.
> >>>> Which will work?
> >>>> i think the errata is necessary so people
> will know what to
> >>>> do. As
> >>>> for a quick M6? I think it depends on the
> %-age of people
> >>>> that will
> >>>> hit the problem.
> >>>> > I discovered a similar problem in TranQL
> that the 1.1
> >>>> SNAPSHOT
> >>>> > doesn't generate the right SQL syntax
> for DB2 and had to
> >>>> tweak the
> >>>> > Syntax Generator. So the option going
> forward is for
> >>>> someone to
> >>>> > pull TranQL 1.2-SNAPSHOT which wil most
> likely break
> >>>> their build
> >>>> > too because of the serialization problem
> (probably not
> >>>> likely with
> >>>> > my example but a high probability for
> other types of fixes).
> >>>> Does this mean as of now, we have a problem
> w/ DB2?
> >>>> >
> >>>> > Sachin had the right idea of
> highlighting the issues with
> >>>> > serialVersionUIDs but that was part of a
> larger
> >>>> problem. I'll open
> >>>> > a feature JIRA that focuses on improved
> serviceability
> >>>> which would
> >>>> > encompass these recurring issues and
> we'll look for
> >>>> someone to step
> >>>> > up to the plate and put a strategy
> together.
> >>>> >
> >>>> yes, I think that's a different (but very
> important) issue
>
=== message truncated ===
__________________________________
Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
http://mail.yahoo.com
