EMF plug-ins are now redundant and have been deleted (GERONIMODEVTOOLS-294). This led to a lot of GEP dependencies going redundant (GERONIMODEVTOOLS-295) and those have also been deleted. (Please see the JIRA comments for detailed information)
GEP has become Surprisingly Thinner - Just 5.4MB!! (down from 12.6MB - nearly 55% reduction in weight). She is becoming more & more attractive each day ;) -- Thanks, Shiva On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 11:48 PM, Shiva Kumar H R <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The remaining two modules (v20.core & v20.ui) have also been ported to an > extent. Thanks again Yun Feng for the patch (you seem to be super fast!). > > Entire GEP builds successfully now. However there is still a lot more > porting to be done. > > -- > Thanks, > Shiva > > On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 3:31 PM, Shiva Kumar H R <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I have committed Yun Feng's patch into GEP trunk. Thanks very much Yun > > Feng. > > > > Build is successful, except for below two modules: > > <module>org.apache.geronimo.st.v20.core</module> > > <module>org.apache.geronimo.st.v20.ui</module> > > > > Once those two modules are also ported onto JAXB, complete build would > > be successful. > > > > -- > > Thanks, > > Shiva > > > > On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 10:44 PM, Shiva Kumar H R <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > > > 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/20080211 for > > > > >> 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
