Perfect. Thanks Tim. I will concentrate on the various ui packages. Yun Feng, Would you like to explore handling multiple schema versions?
-- Thanks, Shiva On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 10:18 PM, Tim McConnell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Shiva, with your current experience with the deployment plan portal, is it > safe > to assume you will again concentrate on the visual aspects of the > refactoring > (deployment plan editors, etc..??) If that is the case, I will concentrate > on > the various version specific > server tool cores (e.g., org.apache.geronimo.st.core, etc).... > > Tim McConnell wrote: > > Hi Shiva, thanks for the update. I will review Yun Feng's patches today > > as well, and start on the refactoring effort as well..... > > > > Shiva Kumar H R wrote: > >> I will be committing Yun Feng's patch today, to kick start GEP > >> refactoring :) > >> > >> This patch adds two new directories under plugins: > >> org.apache.geronimo.deployment.v11.jaxbmodel, and > >> org.apache.geronimo.deployment.v21.jaxbmodel > >> which contain JAXB generated classes for our G plans. The patch has > >> also refactored some part of GEP code to use these JAXB model classes > >> instead of EMF. > >> > >> We need to continue refactoring rest of GEP code and eventually get > >> rid of following EMF modules: > >> org.apache.geronimo.deployment.model > >> org.apache.geronimo.deployment.model.edit > >> org.apache.geronimo.v11.deployment.model > >> org.apache.geronimo.v11.deployment.model.edit > >> > >> And further, once we figure out how to handle multiple schemas, we > >> must be able to merge org.apache.geronimo.deployment.v11.jaxbmodel and > >> org.apache.geronimo.deployment.v21.jaxbmodel into *one* > >> > >> Once we have such single model which can handle multiple schemas, I am > >> hoping that we could merge these as well: > >> org.apache.geronimo.st.ui, > >> org.apache.geronimo.st.v1.ui, > >> org.apache.geronimo.st.v11.ui, > >> org.apache.geronimo.st.v20.ui, and > >> org.apache.geronimo.st.v21.ui > >> > >> Just in case we mess up things ;) we have taken backup of existing GEP > >> trunk under branches/2.1/ . We will be committing all new code under > >> trunk. > >> > >> And trunk builds might fail for sometime until this refactoring is > >> complete. > >> > >> -- > >> Thanks, > >> Shiva > >> > >> On Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 2:11 PM, Shiva Kumar H R <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: > >> > >> There have been further discussions on this in IRC and in JIRA. As > >> recommended in > >> > >> > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/geronimo-dev/200802.mbox/[EMAIL > PROTECTED] > >> > >> I am summarizing those discussions below: > >> (Tim, DJencks, DBlevins & Yun Feng - Please correct if am wrong) > >> > >> 1) JAXB/XMLBeans/DConfigBeans: > >> a) On a further discussion about XMLBeans and JAXB, we saw that > >> writing deployment code might turn out be much easier by using JAXB > >> rather than XMLBeans. > >> > >> b) On a discussion about whether GEP should ideally be using JSR-88 > >> DConfigBeans, we wondered if JSR-88 DConfigBeans are a dead idea & > >> should be left alone, because No One other than Geronimo even > thinks > >> about trying to implement them. > >> > >> So we concluded that it is worth experimenting with JAXB. > >> > >> 2) Hints from OpenEJB about using JAXB: > >> a) On a discussion about how OpenEJB uses JAXB, it seems schemas > are > >> compiled only once (instead of compiling during every build as is > >> currently done both in Geronimo and GEP) and checked in to the > >> source stream. > >> I too don't see any point in compiling G schemas during every build > >> of GEP, and the one time compilation & check in approach of OpenEJB > >> looks ideal to me for GEP also. This would lead to significant > >> savings in build time. Please point out if I am missing something. > >> > >> b) It seems that the real beauty (& ease of use) of JAXB comes from > >> the ability to customize JAXB generated classes (like (i) adding > >> interfaces, (ii) removing all their wrappers for simple types like > >> string, int, boolean etc, (iii) using Maps instead of Lists for > auto > >> indexing things that can be keyed, etc). OpenEJB uses those > >> customizations. To keep the Customized JAXB classes and Schema in > >> sync, OpenEJB has unit tests that read in xml documents, write them > >> out again, then compare the results. A similar approach could be > >> used in GEP also. > >> > >> 3) Handling multiple schema versions > >> I guess JAXB could help us better with multiple version of schemas. > >> (I mean a single set of JAXB classes being able to read/write say > >> geronimo-web.xml in v1.1, v2.0, v2.0.1 etc). We need to explore > this > >> more. > >> > >> Tim, Yun Feng and myself are looking at completing this refactoring > >> at the earliest so that we could then focus on other JIRAs/features > >> & release GEP 2.1. Yun Feng already has a patch that has ported > good > >> amount of GEP onto JAXB and I am looking at committing it tomorrow. > >> > >> If you forsee any concerns with the approaches above, kindly reply. > >> > >> -- Thanks, > >> Shiva > >> > >> > >> On Tue, Feb 12, 2008 at 2:16 PM, Shiva Kumar H R <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: > >> > >> Please see 11-Feb IRC chat btw djencks, shivahr & mcconne > >> http://servlet.uwyn.com/drone/log/bevinbot/geronimo/20080211for > >> further discussions on this. > >> > >> As recommended by DJencks we will experiment using JAXB in GEP > >> 2.1. > >> > >> -- Thanks, > >> Shiva > >> > >> > >> On Feb 11, 2008 9:22 PM, David Jencks <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: > >> > >> > >> On Feb 11, 2008, at 7:16 AM, Shiva Kumar H R wrote: > >> > >>> I went through following tutorials of JAXB & XMLBeans: > >>> a) Java Architecture for XML Binding (JAXB) > >>> > >>> http://java.sun.com/developer/technicalArticles/WebServices/jaxb/ > >>> b) Tutorial: First Steps with XMLBeans > >>> > >>> http://xmlbeans.apache.org/documentation/tutorial_getstarted.html > >>> > >>> Also searched for comparisons btw them. Latest one I could > >>> find is the following blog from Jan'2005: > >>> http://technology.amis.nl/blog/?p=321 > >>> > >>> I am yet to see the value add JAXB brings over XMLBeans. > >>> Am I missing something? > >> > >> My $0.02: > >> > >> xmlbeans is a complete and accurate representation of the > >> xml infoset. As a result, you can easily manipulate the > >> xml, but you get a slightly peculiar java object model that > >> exactly represents the schema and cannot be modified. > >> > >> jaxb is focussed on the java pojos and lets you modify the > >> pojos considerably from the xml while still providing > >> accurate mapping. This can be much more convenient for > >> directly constructing a pojo tree from xml suitable for > >> configuring server components. It provides fewer validity > >> checks than xmlbeans. > >> > >> Openejb is using jaxb and I think their deployment code is > >> pretty simple for the complexity they have to deal with. > >> > >> thanks > >> david jencks > >> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> On Feb 11, 2008 4:44 PM, Shiva Kumar H R > >>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> Despite my liking for xmlbeans and its unique > >>> strengths I think a very strong argument can be > >>> made for moving the deployer code to jaxb. > >>> > >>> Interesting!! Let me do some quick learning of jaxb > >>> and start a separate thread on this. > >>> > >>> > >>> thanks > >>> david jencks > >>> > >>> On Feb 8, 2008, at 12:30 AM, Shiva Kumar H R > wrote: > >>> > >>>> 2) Geronimo Eclipse Plug-in (GEP): > >>>> a) Model framework for Geronimo deployment > >>>> plans: > >>>> Currently it is EMF (Eclipse Modeling Framework). > >>>> With every update to Geronimo deployment schema, > >>>> it's a major pain to generate new EMF classes. If > >>>> however, GEP uses the same model framework as > >>>> that of Geronimo server (XMLBeans), then at least > >>>> this problem would be solved. IIUC JSR-88 > >>>> DConfigBeans would be the ideal model framework > >>>> for GEP - in that case even if the model > >>>> framework of server changes in future, GEP would > >>>> be unaffected. > >>>> > >>>> -- Thanks, > >>>> Shiva > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> -- Thanks, > >>> Shiva > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> -- Thanks, > >>> Shiva > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > -- > Thanks, > Tim McConnell >
