On Feb 13, 2008 1:56 AM, Kevan Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Things that I haven't seen mentioned, yet: > > EE 6 -- we should be seeing an initial EE 6 spec, soon. As other > projects begin implementing EE 6 capabilities, I expect that we'll be > rolling them into Geronimo. There are also new specifications which we > may need to implement ourselves. I know that Jarek has looked at the > Concurrency Utilities specification (which may be part of EE 6). > Hoping he can tell us about that... > > Performance -- One area that I think we need to improve is startup > time. I think our startup has slowed down, and I'd like to see us > speed it up dramatically. We can measure current startup performance > and optimize our hot spots. Depending on what we find, we can also > investigate algorithmic enhancements. >
And what about size of our assemblies? With G1.1.1 I had always taken pride talking about Geronimo being lightweight - a J2EE server under just 35MB!! I remember there were some discussions & effort before 2.0 release. Have we reached a point where we can't reduce the size any further? > Monitoring -- I think we need to get a handle on the metrics that can > be monitored in Geronimo, document them, and look for areas of > improvement. > > Logging -- review our current logging infrastructure. Too many > components lack appropriate logging capabilities. This makes debug and > problem analysis more difficult than it should be. I think we need to > start addressing this problem with more. We're debugging too many > problems, still. > +100 Would go a long way in improving usability/consumability of Geronimo. > Plugin development -- I'd like to make it easier to develop plugins. I > think we should look into tooling support (Eclipse and Netbeans). I'd > also like to simplify the process for administrative creation of > plugins (admin console or admin commands). > > Server assembly -- We could look at simplifying this process. You > currently must have application plugins in order to include > application capabilities in a server assembly. Why not export based on > one or more installed applications? Also, in addition to our current, > low-level module/plugin focus, can we have a simpler/higher-level > focus? Some users would rather choose "JMS" rather than > "org.apache.geronimo.configs/activemq-ra/2.1/car", "JSP/Servlet", > "Deploy" capabilities, etc. > > --kevan > > > > > > -- Thanks, Shiva
