Re: First step towards making kernel more classloader-agnostic
Hi, Those are great changes to merge. Well, the xbean-naming comment could be improved thought :) Thanks, Gianny On 18/03/2009, at 9:47 PM, Gianny Damour wrote: On 18/03/2009, at 6:24 PM, David Jencks wrote: After more work than I expected I have the server running with Configuration being basically a pojo rather than constructing the classloaders itself in its constructor. I commited my current work in sandbox/djencks/framework together with a patch (cl- factore.patch.1 -- I seem to have misspelled factory) for the rest of geronimo. The server starts and seems to work although a bunch of testsuite tests fail when run automatically when I try the same thing by hand they seem to work. Some of the changes: -- separate classloader construction into a factory -- track resolved configuration dependencies in a separate object -- configuration now is a data container -- I basically eliminated the EditableKernelConfigurationManager which is used in a few places to modify existing configurations. I've always thought this ability was a rather bad idea. I would rather replace it with something like always storing the plan into plugins (done now with car-maven-plugin, we just need to add it for stuff deployed into geronimo directly) and providing a way to edit the plan and redeploy the plugin with a new version number (or only letting you edit snapshot plugins) -- There's been a long-standing problem that many of the "auxillary" builders can't figure out whether they need to add dependencies to the environment until after they get to scan for annotations at which time it was too late to modify the classloader. As a result most of these builders always add their dependencies whether or not they are actually needed. I think that since the classloader construction is separated from the configuration initialization we can now solve this problem and create new classloaders each time we update the dependencies. I haven't verified this but am rather hopeful. I think that this is a bit of a conceptual simplification of some of the work the configuration manager is doing and that it would be ok to commit these changes to trunk. The main objection I could see would be to the EditiableConfigurationManager change. This functionality can probably be added back without too much difficulty although I really think it is a mistake. Thoughts? The main change is in rev 755494, I removed an accidental file in rev 755496. I haven't had a chance to look at Gianny's classloader-per-jar patch but I'm hopeful that can be merged into this without excessive difficulty. Based on a cursory review of the changes, a simple change to JarFileClassLoaderFactory should be enough to merge the proposed changes. If the patch makes sense, then I can easily merge against this branch. I will review in more details the overall change, however the extraction of a classloader factory is certainly good. Thanks, Gianny many thanks david jencks
Re: First step towards making kernel more classloader-agnostic
On 18/03/2009, at 6:24 PM, David Jencks wrote: After more work than I expected I have the server running with Configuration being basically a pojo rather than constructing the classloaders itself in its constructor. I commited my current work in sandbox/djencks/framework together with a patch (cl- factore.patch.1 -- I seem to have misspelled factory) for the rest of geronimo. The server starts and seems to work although a bunch of testsuite tests fail when run automatically when I try the same thing by hand they seem to work. Some of the changes: -- separate classloader construction into a factory -- track resolved configuration dependencies in a separate object -- configuration now is a data container -- I basically eliminated the EditableKernelConfigurationManager which is used in a few places to modify existing configurations. I've always thought this ability was a rather bad idea. I would rather replace it with something like always storing the plan into plugins (done now with car-maven-plugin, we just need to add it for stuff deployed into geronimo directly) and providing a way to edit the plan and redeploy the plugin with a new version number (or only letting you edit snapshot plugins) -- There's been a long-standing problem that many of the "auxillary" builders can't figure out whether they need to add dependencies to the environment until after they get to scan for annotations at which time it was too late to modify the classloader. As a result most of these builders always add their dependencies whether or not they are actually needed. I think that since the classloader construction is separated from the configuration initialization we can now solve this problem and create new classloaders each time we update the dependencies. I haven't verified this but am rather hopeful. I think that this is a bit of a conceptual simplification of some of the work the configuration manager is doing and that it would be ok to commit these changes to trunk. The main objection I could see would be to the EditiableConfigurationManager change. This functionality can probably be added back without too much difficulty although I really think it is a mistake. Thoughts? The main change is in rev 755494, I removed an accidental file in rev 755496. I haven't had a chance to look at Gianny's classloader-per-jar patch but I'm hopeful that can be merged into this without excessive difficulty. Based on a cursory review of the changes, a simple change to JarFileClassLoaderFactory should be enough to merge the proposed changes. If the patch makes sense, then I can easily merge against this branch. I will review in more details the overall change, however the extraction of a classloader factory is certainly good. Thanks, Gianny many thanks david jencks
First step towards making kernel more classloader-agnostic
After more work than I expected I have the server running with Configuration being basically a pojo rather than constructing the classloaders itself in its constructor. I commited my current work in sandbox/djencks/framework together with a patch (cl-factore.patch.1 -- I seem to have misspelled factory) for the rest of geronimo. The server starts and seems to work although a bunch of testsuite tests fail when run automatically when I try the same thing by hand they seem to work. Some of the changes: -- separate classloader construction into a factory -- track resolved configuration dependencies in a separate object -- configuration now is a data container -- I basically eliminated the EditableKernelConfigurationManager which is used in a few places to modify existing configurations. I've always thought this ability was a rather bad idea. I would rather replace it with something like always storing the plan into plugins (done now with car-maven-plugin, we just need to add it for stuff deployed into geronimo directly) and providing a way to edit the plan and redeploy the plugin with a new version number (or only letting you edit snapshot plugins) -- There's been a long-standing problem that many of the "auxillary" builders can't figure out whether they need to add dependencies to the environment until after they get to scan for annotations at which time it was too late to modify the classloader. As a result most of these builders always add their dependencies whether or not they are actually needed. I think that since the classloader construction is separated from the configuration initialization we can now solve this problem and create new classloaders each time we update the dependencies. I haven't verified this but am rather hopeful. I think that this is a bit of a conceptual simplification of some of the work the configuration manager is doing and that it would be ok to commit these changes to trunk. The main objection I could see would be to the EditiableConfigurationManager change. This functionality can probably be added back without too much difficulty although I really think it is a mistake. Thoughts? The main change is in rev 755494, I removed an accidental file in rev 755496. I haven't had a chance to look at Gianny's classloader-per-jar patch but I'm hopeful that can be merged into this without excessive difficulty. many thanks david jencks
