Re: source-repository (in plugin metadata) and default-repository (in plugin catalog)
Hi Donald, thanks for the feedback. I've made the change as described in JIRA G 4370. Please let me know if we should pull this into 2.1 branch (I think it will require some manual patch as pluginInstallerGBean has changed a lot in trunk so I only checked the code into trunk for now). Lin On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 4:56 PM, Donald Woods [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sounds good. That was the way I thought it was/should work. -Donald Lin Sun wrote: Hi, We provide source-repository in plugin metadata and default-repository in plugin catalog. Currently, (I think this is how it works) when we install a plugin from a remote repo A, if the installation is not restricted to the particular repo A: If the plugin specifies 1+ source-repository, we'll use that and ignore the default-repository specified in plugin catalog. If the plugin doesn't specify any source-repository, we'll use the default-repository specified in the plugin catalog. I 'd like to change it to: If the plugin specifies 1+ source-repository, we'll use that AND the default-repository specified in plugin catalog. I think that would give us more flexibility. Thoughts? P.S. this is related to this thread on user list where a user wants to install active mq on top of little G env - http://www.nabble.com/how-to-add-activemq-to-little-g--to19837127s134.html Lin
Re: source-repository (in plugin metadata) and default-repository (in plugin catalog)
Yep, seems like a fix that would be useful for 2.1 users. -Donald Lin Sun wrote: Hi Donald, thanks for the feedback. I've made the change as described in JIRA G 4370. Please let me know if we should pull this into 2.1 branch (I think it will require some manual patch as pluginInstallerGBean has changed a lot in trunk so I only checked the code into trunk for now). Lin On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 4:56 PM, Donald Woods [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sounds good. That was the way I thought it was/should work. -Donald Lin Sun wrote: Hi, We provide source-repository in plugin metadata and default-repository in plugin catalog. Currently, (I think this is how it works) when we install a plugin from a remote repo A, if the installation is not restricted to the particular repo A: If the plugin specifies 1+ source-repository, we'll use that and ignore the default-repository specified in plugin catalog. If the plugin doesn't specify any source-repository, we'll use the default-repository specified in the plugin catalog. I 'd like to change it to: If the plugin specifies 1+ source-repository, we'll use that AND the default-repository specified in plugin catalog. I think that would give us more flexibility. Thoughts? P.S. this is related to this thread on user list where a user wants to install active mq on top of little G env - http://www.nabble.com/how-to-add-activemq-to-little-g--to19837127s134.html Lin
source-repository (in plugin metadata) and default-repository (in plugin catalog)
Hi, We provide source-repository in plugin metadata and default-repository in plugin catalog. Currently, (I think this is how it works) when we install a plugin from a remote repo A, if the installation is not restricted to the particular repo A: If the plugin specifies 1+ source-repository, we'll use that and ignore the default-repository specified in plugin catalog. If the plugin doesn't specify any source-repository, we'll use the default-repository specified in the plugin catalog. I 'd like to change it to: If the plugin specifies 1+ source-repository, we'll use that AND the default-repository specified in plugin catalog. I think that would give us more flexibility. Thoughts? P.S. this is related to this thread on user list where a user wants to install active mq on top of little G env - http://www.nabble.com/how-to-add-activemq-to-little-g--to19837127s134.html Lin
Re: source-repository (in plugin metadata) and default-repository (in plugin catalog)
Sounds good. That was the way I thought it was/should work. -Donald Lin Sun wrote: Hi, We provide source-repository in plugin metadata and default-repository in plugin catalog. Currently, (I think this is how it works) when we install a plugin from a remote repo A, if the installation is not restricted to the particular repo A: If the plugin specifies 1+ source-repository, we'll use that and ignore the default-repository specified in plugin catalog. If the plugin doesn't specify any source-repository, we'll use the default-repository specified in the plugin catalog. I 'd like to change it to: If the plugin specifies 1+ source-repository, we'll use that AND the default-repository specified in plugin catalog. I think that would give us more flexibility. Thoughts? P.S. this is related to this thread on user list where a user wants to install active mq on top of little G env - http://www.nabble.com/how-to-add-activemq-to-little-g--to19837127s134.html Lin
