Thanks all for your comments. And I really appreciate the category that David suggested, I think it's ok except that 1. JMS Resources and Database Pools stay under Resources group. IIUC, developers can use @Resource annotation to inject these objects during runtime. And that's the major reason they shall be in Resources group. 2. Server logs and Derby logs might be placed in another group called Troubleshooting? or put them together with Monitoring, other viewers and name as Troubleshooting?
About portlets such as LDAP Viewer, Apach HTTP we can just leave them as is. Maybe we could find a better solution for them at the time of G3.0 is released. Donald is making a good point here. And we do need to consider the risk of this change. Here are my thoughts for your consideration. As for the doc issue, I remember there are several contributors in the community would love to help with doc update, maybe we can invite them for this task once we decide to make the change of navigation pane in G2.2. AFAICT, the update to doc won't take too much efforts. While for the testsuite issue, maybe we need someone with more experience in browser based test scripts to evaluate the size of impact. Anyway, I am just proposing the changes and as I mentioned at the very beginning of this thread, this change in G2.2 is only a transitional stage for users to learn we are trying to improve our console for better usability. So still waiting for your decision before I open a JIRA for this one. Thanks again. Jeff C On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 10:05 PM, Donald Woods <dwo...@apache.org> wrote: > The risk is in the testsuite and docs, as some of the browser based tests > have to specify the navigation path and/or portlet names. Making changes > like this right before David is ready to start a release candidate is too > risky in my book. > > Also, the docs would need to be scrubbed to fix any console navigational > guides to specific portlets. > > > -Donald > > > Shawn Jiang wrote: > >> This change is quite straightforward so that there's no risk from the >> technical perspective. >> IMO, If there's no non-tech objections, we should include it in new 22 >> release. >> >> On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 1:09 PM, Rex Wang <rwo...@gmail.com <mailto: >> rwo...@gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> Hi Jeff, >> It is OK to me for 3.0 >> but 2.2 is going to release. Looks like there is no time to do such >> changes.. >> >> -Rex >> >> 2009/11/20 chi runhua <chirun...@gmail.com <mailto:chirun...@gmail.com >> >> >> >> >> Hi devs, >> >> With the help of Shawn, we realized it's pretty easy to >> re-categorize the items in navigation pane because of flexible >> architecture of Geronimo plugin system. Just wonder if we could >> include the updates to the coming G2.2 release as a transitional >> stage of Console improvement task in G3.0. Here is how I did it. >> Locate all the AdminConsoleExtensionGBean in plan.xml of >> each >> portlet and change the pageTitle attribute. For example, >> Update >> <gbean name="JMSServerManager" >> class="org.apache.geronimo.pluto.AdminConsoleExtensionGBean"> >> <attribute name="pageTitle">Server/JMS >> Server</attribute> >> ... >> To >> <gbean name="JMSServerManager" >> class="org.apache.geronimo.pluto.AdminConsoleExtensionGBean"> >> <attribute name="pageTitle">Application Server/JMS >> Server</attribute> >> ... >> The new category is nearly identical with the proposal in >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-4950. I've built >> the server assembly locally and looks everything just works fine. >> >> If you think it's acceptable, I'll open a new JIRA and submit >> the patches for 2.2 branch&trunk later. >> >> Any comments? >> >> >> Jeff C >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Shawn >> >
