p, LLC
>
> 618.589.9380
>
> 618.531.2559 (mobile)
>
> 1728 Corporate Crossing
>
> O'Fallon, IL 62269
>
>
>
> *From:* Architecture [mailto:architecture-boun...@wso2.org] *On Behalf Of
> *Ramith Jayasinghe
> *Sent:* Monday, October 19, 2015 5:04 AM
> *To:*
AM
To: architecture
Cc: Chiranga Alwis
Subject: Re: [Architecture] [C5] Including carbon-tools with product
distribution
How realistic would that be? :)
well, the reality is users comes with different experience, expertise (and we
need to support them)
so we got, Leanness + shorter startup time at the ex
How realistic would that be? :)
well, the reality is users comes with different experience, expertise (and
we need to support them)
so we got, Leanness + shorter startup time at the expense of 'introducing
a possibility for user to make a mistake'.
I would rather eliminate 'room for error' that re
Then those devops should be fired! If they are proper devops people, they
should have scripts for everything.
On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 3:03 PM, Ramith Jayasinghe wrote:
> My concern is would this become a problem when devops users forget to run
> these when needed (- might lead to errors that cou
My concern is would this become a problem when devops users forget to run
these when needed (- might lead to errors that could have been prevented at
the penalty of delay in start up sequence.).
On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 2:32 PM, Afkham Azeez wrote:
> No need to make the packs bloated by packing
No need to make the packs bloated by packing in all the patches & adding
unnecessary overhead. With C5, leanness & performance are core requirements.
On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 2:26 PM, Nandika Jayawardana
wrote:
> If the server startup time is the only concern, why not provide an option
> for the
If the server startup time is the only concern, why not provide an option
for the user to disable executing these tools instead.
Regards
Nandika
On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 11:52 AM, Ramith Jayasinghe wrote:
> how would the user experience change due to this?
> would that impose additional burden o
how would the user experience change due to this?
would that impose additional burden on dev ops?
On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 11:22 AM, Sameera Jayasoma wrote:
> +1. Yes, running them separately will improve the startup time as well.
>
> On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 10:49 PM, Afkham Azeez wrote:
>
>> +1
+1. Yes, running them separately will improve the startup time as well.
On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 10:49 PM, Afkham Azeez wrote:
> +1 for running these separately.
>
> On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 11:17 AM, Kishanthan Thangarajah <
> kishant...@wso2.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> We need to decide on how to
+1 for running these separately.
On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 11:17 AM, Kishanthan Thangarajah <
kishant...@wso2.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We need to decide on how to include following tools for C5.
>
> 1. jar-to-bundle-convertor
> 2. patching tool
>
> In C4, these tools were part of the distribution and
Hi,
We need to decide on how to include following tools for C5.
1. jar-to-bundle-convertor
2. patching tool
In C4, these tools were part of the distribution and they run during the
initial stages of server startup before the OSGi runtime is initialized and
started.
For C5, our idea is *not* to
11 matches
Mail list logo
