+1
On Sat, Apr 6, 2013 at 5:48 PM, Glen Mazza <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi team, as part of Dave's Maven simplifications I'd like to see our rump > code that we have for planet-web (and the modified Ant version kept > separately at roller/planet/trunk) deleted from SVN so we can channel our > limited time to maintaining and modernizing the Roller application > exclusively. Dave has alerted me earlier that Roller already has a > Planet-type functionality built into it that we can continue to use and > enhanced as desired: > http://rollerweblogger.org/**project/page/planet<http://rollerweblogger.org/project/page/planet> > . > > As I understand planet-web was never released, we have two partially > working and different versions of it and it's unclear which is the source > of record. Further, it is of little practical value to have a solid Planet > Web app unless the Roller it relies on is in very good shape, but the > amount of time it would take to make the Planet up-to-date would come at > the expense of Roller, making Planet irrelevant anyway. Planet can be > resurrected in the future should there be enough demand for it and the team > grows enough to have people willing to rebuild it. > > Thoughts? > > Regards, > Glen > > > > On 03/31/2013 09:04 AM, Glen Mazza wrote: > >> Question below... >> >> On 03/24/2013 09:19 AM, Dave wrote: >> >>> On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 6:31 AM, Glen Mazza<[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Dave, no problem with separating out planet, but adding planet-web >>>> just >>>> adds 5 seconds to the build time (roughly 2% longer), at least on my >>>> machine, and is good for others looking at the code and for letting us >>>> know >>>> if/when a planet-web dependency has fallen out of date and is no longer >>>> available, so I'd like to reactivate it for the time being: >>>> >>> Those are good points. I'm +0 on keeping the Planet Webapp in the build >>> process. >>> >>> >>> >>> But I noticed we have a more fundamental problem--we're presently >>>> maintaining two sources of record for the planet source code, something >>>> I'd >>>> like to rectify ASAP if I can: >>>> 1.)http://svn.apache.org/**viewvc/**roller/planet/core/**trunk/<http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/**roller/planet/core/trunk/> >>>> <http://svn.apache.org/**viewvc/roller/planet/core/**trunk/<http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/roller/planet/core/trunk/>>(Ant-based >>>> Planet) >>>> >>>> 2.)http://svn.apache.org/**viewvc/**roller/trunk/<http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/**roller/trunk/> >>>> <http://**svn.apache.org/viewvc/roller/**trunk/<http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/roller/trunk/>>(Maven-based >>>> Planet) >>>> >>>> It seems that when #1 was done the source code wasn't deleted in #2; >>>> OTOH, >>>> if #2 was based on #1 I think I can go ahead and delete #1 to solve the >>>> multiple source problem; later, we'll just need to move planet-web and >>>> planet-business (and a new pom.xml) to #1's location and then we'll have >>>> two separate web apps. (We might keep planet-business in its present >>>> location for a longer term due to it being a dependency for Roller right >>>> now.) >>>> >>>> Yuck. I did not remember that little mess. >>> >>> >> Hi Dave, which is the present most accurate source of record for Planet >> Web? Neither of the planet WARs generated by the two branches work OOTB >> (different errors though). >> >> My read of the situation is that the never-formally-released >> roller/trunk/planet-web wasn't fully Mavenized yet (which I can probably >> take care of, leveraging what we already have in weblogger-war's pom) which >> is why it was commented-out in the Roller root pom.xml, but what is there >> (and *not* the Ant version) is nonetheless the most up-to-date source for >> the Planet code. >> >> That seems to be the case because planet-web/pom.xml was missing an >> important dependency already in weblogger-web/pom.xml ( >> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/**roller/trunk/planet-web/pom.** >> xml?r1=1462935&r2=1462934&**pathrev=1462935<http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/roller/trunk/planet-web/pom.xml?r1=1462935&r2=1462934&pathrev=1462935>), >> meaning that couldn't have been working via Maven yet. (Even after adding >> the dependency, the new bug report I get from the browser: >> *"There is no Action mapped for namespace /planet-ui and action name >> homepage. - [unknown location]* >> com.opensymphony.xwork2.**DefaultActionProxy.prepare(** >> DefaultActionProxy.java:189) >> org.apache.struts2.impl.**StrutsActionProxy.prepare(** >> StrutsActionProxy.java:61) >> org.apache.struts2.impl.**StrutsActionProxyFactory.** >> createActionProxy(**StrutsActionProxyFactory.java:**39) >> com.opensymphony.xwork2.**DefaultActionProxyFactory.** >> createActionProxy(**DefaultActionProxyFactory.**java:58) >> org.apache.struts2.dispatcher.**Dispatcher.serviceAction(** >> Dispatcher.java:488) >> ) indicates some more hacking is needed to get it to work. >> >> In contrast the war generated in the Ant version at >> roller/planet/core/trunk hasn't been updated in 4 years, generates a WAR >> called roller-planet-0.45.war, and generally has older dependencies than >> what is in the Mavenized version: no Spring JARs, acegi-security instead >> of Spring Security, Struts 2.0 vs. Struts 2.2, commons* JARs a bit older, >> etc. The struts.xml in the Ant version is also substantively more complex >> (I guess because it didn't switch to Spring-web yet) than the one in >> planet-web ([1] vs. [2]). Then again, it could be that the Ant version is >> the accurate one, it's just the planet-web pom has dependencies copied over >> from weblogger-web pom without the underlying Planet code incurring the >> architectural upgrade yet. >> >> My goal is to get the Mavenized planet-web working, I'm just not sure >> which source code I should be leveraging for that. >> >> Thanks, >> Glen >> >> [1] http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/**roller/planet/core/trunk/web/** >> WEB-INF/classes/struts.xml?**view=markup<http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/roller/planet/core/trunk/web/WEB-INF/classes/struts.xml?view=markup> >> [2] http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/**roller/trunk/planet-web/src/** >> main/resources/struts.xml?&**view=markup<http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/roller/trunk/planet-web/src/main/resources/struts.xml?&view=markup> >> >> >> >> >> >> So I'd like to: >>>> 1.) Reactivate planet-web in the pom.xml >>>> 2.) Delete the source code in #1 (svn delete) so we're at one source of >>>> record. >>>> 3.) (at a later date) Move planet-web to 1's location, with a new >>>> pom.xml >>>> and a dependency on planet-business (and possibly test-utils) in Roller. >>>> 4.) (if I can sever the planet-business dependency from Roller), move >>>> planet-business there too. >>>> >>>> That all sounds good to me. >>> >>> - Dave >>> >>> >> >
