On 9/19/07, Tim McConnell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Shiva, thanks for the information. I'm not sure I feel comfortable
modifying
a user's eclipse.ini file, especially without their knowledge. What I
think we
should do though is include these settings in the release notes for this
release,
On 9/17/07, Shiva Kumar H R [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Some more observations while testing Geronimo Eclipse Plugin 2.0.0 (RC3):
a) When defining a new server, Apache Geronimo v1.2 Server doesn't get
listed in the list of available servers.
b) Looks like WTP 2.0.1RC2 has solved the problem
Hi Shiva, thanks for the information. I'm not sure I feel comfortable modifying
a user's eclipse.ini file, especially without their knowledge. What I think we
should do though is include these settings in the release notes for this
release, and possibly on the updated website for the
Apache
True. We should document the changes needed in the ini file instead of
making the changes automatically.
Vamsi
On 9/19/07, Tim McConnell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Shiva, thanks for the information. I'm not sure I feel comfortable
modifying
a user's eclipse.ini file, especially without
Tim,
The Install prerequisites section of
http://people.apache.org/~mcconne/releases/RC3/Geronimo_Eclipse_Plugin_2.0.0_Instructions-RC3.txt
needs following updates:
1) 1 -- Europa (also known as Eclipse 3.3), which is platform specific
Need to mention package name as Eclipse Classic to avoid
I have successfully deployed and invoked these applications with RC3:
-- Daytrader
-- calculator-stateless-pojo
--
Thanks,
Tim McConnell
Some more observations while testing Geronimo Eclipse Plugin 2.0.0 (RC3):
a) When defining a new server, Apache Geronimo v1.2 Server doesn't get
listed in the list of available servers.
b) Looks like WTP 2.0.1RC2 has solved the problem reported in
GERONIMODEVTOOLS-209 if the HelloWorld WAR's
Hi Ted, yes I shall do that now--it never occurred to me that anyone would want
to use 1.0 and 1.1
Ted Kirby wrote:
From the staging update site, I downloaded and installed a 2.0 tomcat
server, started it, brought up the console, and stopped it, with WTP
2.0.1 RC2.
I could not download a 1.1
From the staging update site, I downloaded and installed a 2.0 tomcat
server, started it, brought up the console, and stopped it, with WTP
2.0.1 RC2.
I could not download a 1.1 server. Tim, can you put the 1.0 and 1.1
runtimes on the staging site? I presume they'll also be on the
production
Start of discussion thread.
--
Thanks,
Tim McConnell
Things don't automatically happen in WTP 1.5.1. We had to register our
features with WTP to get it shown up on the list. I hope they are doing
this automatically for 2.0.1 RC too, but if not, we probably should
raise a WTP bugzilla as soon as possible to get it into 2.0.1.
Lin
Ted Kirby
On 9/14/07, Lin Sun [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tim, thanks for your nice instruction. I am able to do scenario 2 fine
without any prob!
I have noticed 2 things:
1) one other recommended scenario (may be the most recommended scenario)
used to be not download anything, but start at define a
Thanks for catching this Kan Ogawa. I will re-open GERONIMODEVTOOLS-107.
- Shiva
On 9/14/07, Kan Ogawa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tim,
Tim McConnell wrote:
Start of discussion thread.
The GERONIMODEVTOOLS-107 issue that was already closed is not
fully fixed yet in 2.0.0 RC2.
( Now,
Hi Kan, we shall try !!
Kan Ogawa wrote:
Tim,
Tim McConnell wrote:
Start of discussion thread.
The GERONIMODEVTOOLS-107 issue that was already closed is not fully
fixed yet in 2.0.0 RC2.
( Now, I don't reopen this issue yet. )
I forward here my reply to question that Ted Kirby
Why is the discussion on the eclipse plugin release happening in the [VOTE]
thread?
Vamsi
On 9/12/07, Tim McConnell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Donalds, Yes now that all the License files have been fixed (thanks to
Kevan)
I plan on another vote later today. Thanks
Donald Woods wrote:
I would like to see download links to the following items on the
project site at http://geronimo.apache.org/development-tools.html under
prerequisites section.
1 -- Europa (also known as Eclipse 3.3), which is platform specific
2 -- Web Tools Platform (WTP) 2.0.1
3 -- Data Tools Platform
On 9/12/07, Tim McConnell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Start of discussion thread.
Hi Tim,
I'm pretty sure I asked about it (or was about to have asked, but
failed), but why is the plugin called g-eclipse-plugin? Wouldn't it be
better off if it called geronimo-eclipse-plugin? It doesn't say
Ted,
I see you have updated the version of Web Tools Platform (WTP) to 2.0.1 from
2.0. However on http://download.eclipse.org/webtools/downloads/ I see that
2.0.1 is not yet released (only RC1 is available). Was it a typo?
- Shiva
On 9/13/07, Ted Kirby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Looks good.
On 9/13/07, Anita Kulshreshtha [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I would like to see download links to the following items on the
project site at http://geronimo.apache.org/development-tools.html under
prerequisites section.
Thanks for capturing this Anita. Also
On 9/13/07, Jacek Laskowski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 9/12/07, Tim McConnell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Start of discussion thread.
Hi Tim,
I'm pretty sure I asked about it (or was about to have asked, but
failed), but why is the plugin called g-eclipse-plugin? Wouldn't it be
better
You'd have to ask Sachin why he named the assemblies that way.
-Donald
Jacek Laskowski wrote:
On 9/12/07, Tim McConnell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Start of discussion thread.
Hi Tim,
I'm pretty sure I asked about it (or was about to have asked, but
failed), but why is the plugin
Need to be more specific on the Eclipse package that users need, now that
there are 5 different distros -
1 -- Europa (also known as Eclipse 3.3), which is platform specific
1 -- Eclipse IDE for Java EE Developers (Europa v3.3 or later)
Also, by prereqing WTP 2.0.1, I think it requires newer
Tim and I have been working hard on getting the Download and Install
function to work to download a server for the eclipse update site and
install it your machine. The stablest level on which we have found
this to work is WTP2.0.1RC1. Other minor issues/problems occur at
lower WTP levels.
FWIW, I followed the Use Staging Site instructions and used update
manager's staging_site to download tomcat version on windows. The
server and the admin console started fine. I got download urls for
various parts from ant build file at
http://people.apache.org/~mcconne/releases/RC2/build.xml
Understand your frustrations, but the Eclipse levels in build.xml have nothing
to do with the user runtime levels and don't need to be updated unless we want
to use newer features/APIs in future Eclipse 3.3.x or WTP 2.0.x releases
I think we all have learned now not to depend on the major
On 9/13/07, Donald Woods [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Need to be more specific on the Eclipse package that users need, now that
there are 5 different distros -
1 -- Europa (also known as Eclipse 3.3), which is platform specific
1 -- Eclipse IDE for Java EE Developers (Europa v3.3 or later)
On 9/13/07, Shiva Kumar H R [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 9/13/07, Donald Woods [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Need to be more specific on the Eclipse package that users need, now
that
there are 5 different distros -
1 -- Europa (also known as Eclipse 3.3), which is platform specific
1
Thanks for the clarification. Guess if users only wanted Geronimo 2.0 server
support, then they could use the intended for Java EE Developers package, as
that has been working for me, but I've only been testing against a 2.0.1
server
-Donald
Shiva Kumar H R wrote:
On 9/13/07, *Donald
Or use the WTP 2.0.1 All-in-one bundle when its released, as it should include
the Eclipse SDK Classic bundle as the WTP 2.0 all-in-one bundle included.
-Donald
Donald Woods wrote:
Thanks for the clarification. Guess if users only wanted Geronimo 2.0
server support, then they could use the
Great, thanks Ted
Ted Kirby wrote:
Looks good. Thanks Tim.
Attached are some minor updates/feedback on your instructions.
On 9/12/07, Tim McConnell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Start of discussion thread.
--
Thanks,
Tim McConnell
--
Thanks,
Tim McConnell
Oh! wasn't aware of those problems. Hadn't tried Download and Install,
rather was directly unzipping the *deployable.zip. And everything worked
fine even with WTP 2.0 (wtp-all-in-one-sdk-win32).
Good that we have discovered Download and Install doesn't work with WTP
2.0 and only works with WTP
Thanks for the reminder Anita, The project site and the accompanying release
notes will be updated as soon as the release candidate is approved. I've also
updated the Release Process steps (URL below) to include this step just so we
don't forget. Thanks
Hi Jacek, yes that's a very good idea. To be honest, I'm not sure why Sachin
called it g-eclipse-plugin. But as Shiva has suggested I've opened a JIRA to
include it in the next release
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMODEVTOOLS-205
Jacek Laskowski wrote:
On 9/12/07, Tim
Huge sigh of relief !! Thanks Anita
Anita Kulshreshtha wrote:
FWIW, I followed the Use Staging Site instructions and used update
manager's staging_site to download tomcat version on windows. The
server and the admin console started fine. I got download urls for
various parts from ant build file
As to my frustrations, I was asked! :-)
Yes, that is a good point you raise about the distinction between
build level and user run level. I view it, however, as a beneficial
short-term tactic, until WTP.2.0.1 GAs, but not a beneficial long term
strategy or approach.
I think Tim provided great
Tim, thanks for your nice instruction. I am able to do scenario 2 fine
without any prob!
I have noticed 2 things:
1) one other recommended scenario (may be the most recommended scenario)
used to be not download anything, but start at define a server then
choose the link called download
On 9/13/07, Lin Sun [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tim, thanks for your nice instruction. I am able to do scenario 2 fine
without any prob!
I have noticed 2 things:
1) one other recommended scenario (may be the most recommended scenario)
used to be not download anything, but start at define a
Hi Lin,
1) yes that is actually the last step in our Release Eclipse Plugin Process
(i.e., to ensure that the server and/or plugin can be downloaded from Eclipse
without having to add a new Remote Site from the Eclipse Help panels).
Unfortunately, this is not a scenario that can be emulated
Hi Donalds, Yes now that all the License files have been fixed (thanks to Kevan)
I plan on another vote later today. Thanks
Donald Woods wrote:
Tim, how is the 2.0.0 plugin updates coming?
Do you have an outlook for when we'll be ready for another RC vote?
-Donald
Kevan Miller wrote:
Hey
Start of discussion thread.
--
Thanks,
Tim McConnell
Looks good. Thanks Tim.
Attached are some minor updates/feedback on your instructions.
On 9/12/07, Tim McConnell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Start of discussion thread.
--
Thanks,
Tim McConnell
=== Step #1 --
Tim, how is the 2.0.0 plugin updates coming?
Do you have an outlook for when we'll be ready for another RC vote?
-Donald
Kevan Miller wrote:
Hey Tim,
Apologies for my slow review of the Eclipse plugin. Reviewing the binary
distribution, it looks like we are missing license and notice
Does it mean we will need to spin a new RC?
Vamsi
On 9/7/07, Kevan Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hey Tim,
Apologies for my slow review of the Eclipse plugin. Reviewing the
binary distribution, it looks like we are missing license and notice
information for xpp3. There may be a few more
On Sep 7, 2007, at 12:54 PM, Vamsavardhana Reddy wrote:
Does it mean we will need to spin a new RC?
We can't release the binaries in their current state. So, yes.
--kevan
Vamsi
On 9/7/07, Kevan Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hey Tim,
Apologies for my slow review of the Eclipse plugin.
Hi Kevan, yes please do
Kevan Miller wrote:
Hey Tim,
Apologies for my slow review of the Eclipse plugin. Reviewing the binary
distribution, it looks like we are missing license and notice
information for xpp3. There may be a few more notices missing, also.
With your permission, I'll make
Hey Tim,
Apologies for my slow review of the Eclipse plugin. Reviewing the
binary distribution, it looks like we are missing license and notice
information for xpp3. There may be a few more notices missing, also.
With your permission, I'll make updates to the license and notice
files in
This might be an opportunity to introduce the maven-remote-resources-
plugin and the maven-rat-plugin.
thanks
david jencks
On Sep 7, 2007, at 9:38 AM, Kevan Miller wrote:
Hey Tim,
Apologies for my slow review of the Eclipse plugin. Reviewing the
binary distribution, it looks like we are
47 matches
Mail list logo
