Re: [Vote] Geronimo Eclipse Plugin v1.1.0
Thanks for your feedback, agree on all points.On Jul 18, 2006, at 10:00 AM, John Sisson wrote:Installed eclipse 3.2, installed JST (J2EE Standard Tools and its dependencies), pointed it to an existing geronimo installation and created a J2EE project. I haven't had the time to read eclipse tutorials on using the JST, so didn't build anything.Have you thought about using a tool like wink ( http://www.debugmode.com/wink/ ) to do a walkthrough of the functionality to help get users started? I think it could really help get more users/developers interested and spread your knowledge :-).IMHO we should at least have a draft of the release notes when voting for a release and should be testing pretty much what our users will see. AFAIK, there isn't any user documentation we can look at for this release at the moment.I looked at the release notes for the previous release ( http://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/PLUGIN_RELEASE-NOTES-1.0.0.txt ) and have the following comments if it is to be used as the basis for this release:* should mention JST is required. I tried just using WST and it didn't work.* describe what has changed other than the 8 bug fixes listed in JIRA for this release* describe what doesn't work completely - there was some mention of things not completely implemented earlier in this thread* mention help for dialogs during project creation isn't done* limit line length in file to 80 chars for easy readingFYI just in case others run into problems updating eclipse 3.2 with WST etc, I wasted a bit of time when I hit a bug with the eclipse update processing when downloading from a local mirror. Added to comments to issue https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=148886 . Trying the update with the main eclipse mirror site worked ok.Regards,JohnSachin Patel wrote: Folks, its been almost a week and I still have 0 binding votes. Please vote.On Jul 11, 2006, at 4:33 PM, Kevan Miller wrote: On Jul 11, 2006, at 4:09 PM, Sachin Patel wrote: FYI the current vote is on.. (breaking the all time software record on the number of release candidate drivers in one day)http://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse-plugin-1.1-deployable-RC10.zip Sachin, All the license/notices look good. I created/started a server; created, deployed and tested a jsp. Looks good to me. Nice work!Here's my non-binding +1.--kevan -sachin -sachin
Re: [Vote] Geronimo Eclipse Plugin v1.1.0
Installed eclipse 3.2, installed JST (J2EE Standard Tools and its dependencies), pointed it to an existing geronimo installation and created a J2EE project. I haven't had the time to read eclipse tutorials on using the JST, so didn't build anything. Have you thought about using a tool like wink ( http://www.debugmode.com/wink/ ) to do a walkthrough of the functionality to help get users started? I think it could really help get more users/developers interested and spread your knowledge :-). IMHO we should at least have a draft of the release notes when voting for a release and should be testing pretty much what our users will see. AFAIK, there isn't any user documentation we can look at for this release at the moment. I looked at the release notes for the previous release ( http://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/PLUGIN_RELEASE-NOTES-1.0.0.txt ) and have the following comments if it is to be used as the basis for this release: * should mention JST is required. I tried just using WST and it didn't work. * describe what has changed other than the 8 bug fixes listed in JIRA for this release * describe what doesn't work completely - there was some mention of things not completely implemented earlier in this thread * mention help for dialogs during project creation isn't done * limit line length in file to 80 chars for easy reading FYI just in case others run into problems updating eclipse 3.2 with WST etc, I wasted a bit of time when I hit a bug with the eclipse update processing when downloading from a local mirror. Added to comments to issue https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=148886 . Trying the update with the main eclipse mirror site worked ok. Regards, John Sachin Patel wrote: Folks, its been almost a week and I still have 0 binding votes. Please vote. On Jul 11, 2006, at 4:33 PM, Kevan Miller wrote: On Jul 11, 2006, at 4:09 PM, Sachin Patel wrote: FYI the current vote is on.. (breaking the all time software record on the number of release candidate drivers in one day) http://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse-plugin-1.1-deployable-RC10.zip Sachin, All the license/notices look good. I created/started a server; created, deployed and tested a jsp. Looks good to me. Nice work! Here's my non-binding +1. --kevan -sachin
Re: [Vote] Geronimo Eclipse Plugin v1.1.0
Downloaded and installed. +1 Sachin Patel wrote: Folks, its been almost a week and I still have 0 binding votes. Please vote. On Jul 11, 2006, at 4:33 PM, Kevan Miller wrote: On Jul 11, 2006, at 4:09 PM, Sachin Patel wrote: FYI the current vote is on.. (breaking the all time software record on the number of release candidate drivers in one day) http://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse-plugin-1.1-deployable-RC10.zip Sachin, All the license/notices look good. I created/started a server; created, deployed and tested a jsp. Looks good to me. Nice work! Here's my non-binding +1. --kevan -sachin
Re: [Vote] Geronimo Eclipse Plugin v1.1.0
My non-binding +1--jasonOn Jul 15, 2006, at 8:09 AM, Sachin Patel wrote:Folks, its been almost a week and I still have 0 binding votes. Please vote.On Jul 11, 2006, at 4:33 PM, Kevan Miller wrote:On Jul 11, 2006, at 4:09 PM, Sachin Patel wrote:FYI the current vote is on.. (breaking the all time software record on the number of release candidate drivers in one day)http://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse-plugin-1.1-deployable-RC10.zip
Re: [Vote] Geronimo Eclipse Plugin v1.1.0
+1 Sachin Patel wrote: > Folks, its been almost a week and I still have 0 binding votes. Please > vote. > > On Jul 11, 2006, at 4:33 PM, Kevan Miller wrote: > >> >> On Jul 11, 2006, at 4:09 PM, Sachin Patel wrote: >> >>> FYI the current vote is on.. (breaking the all time software record >>> on the number of release candidate drivers in one day) >>> >>> http://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse-plugin-1.1-deployable-RC10.zip >>> >> >> Sachin, >> All the license/notices look good. I created/started a server; >> created, deployed and tested a jsp. Looks good to me. Nice work! >> >> Here's my non-binding +1. >> >> --kevan > > > -sachin > >
Re: [Vote] Geronimo Eclipse Plugin v1.1.0
Folks, its been almost a week and I still have 0 binding votes. Please vote.On Jul 11, 2006, at 4:33 PM, Kevan Miller wrote:On Jul 11, 2006, at 4:09 PM, Sachin Patel wrote:FYI the current vote is on.. (breaking the all time software record on the number of release candidate drivers in one day)http://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse-plugin-1.1-deployable-RC10.zipSachin, All the license/notices look good. I created/started a server; created, deployed and tested a jsp. Looks good to me. Nice work!Here's my non-binding +1.--kevan -sachin
RE: [Vote] Geronimo Eclipse Plugin v1.1.0
Hi Sachin, Ive tried the RC 4 or 5, and heres some feedback from me: 1) Simple jsp and servlet appears to be working with 1.1 server. 2) Simple jsp and servlet appears to be working with 1.0 server. 3) I started to have trouble with the tomcat-jsp 5.5.12-1 examples, as the deployment plan after import was not recognized by the Geronimo deployment plan editor. I have had similar prob in the past and the solution is a bit painful - covert the Geronimo-web.xml to whatever full qualified tags the plugin likes. (I posted a discussion on this a while back ago). 4) Is the release note avail? I can only find 1.0 release note. I 'd like to know the new functions in 1.1 besides the test environment option. 5) I don't see the update site package avail. I'd really like to see users being able to update from 1.0 plugin to 1.1's plugin via update manager. Lin -Original Message- From: Sachin Patel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sachin Patel Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2006 4:10 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Vote] Geronimo Eclipse Plugin v1.1.0 FYI the current vote is on.. (breaking the all time software record on the number of release candidate drivers in one day) http://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse-plugin-1.1 -deployable-RC10.zip On Jul 11, 2006, at 1:48 PM, Sachin Patel wrote: done On Jul 11, 2006, at 1:24 PM, Lin Sun wrote: I just checked the g-eclipse-plugin-1.1-updatesite-RC5.zip file and only see Apache License there (not the full Apache 2.0 license) in all 3 features. It might be important to correct the license in these features as installing via update manager is the recommended method to install the Eclipse plugin. In Eclipse, user will have to accept the licenses in install panel before the Eclipse continues the installation. Lin -Original Message- From: Sachin Patel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sachin Patel Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2006 12:58 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Vote] Geronimo Eclipse Plugin v1.1.0 Ok one last time hopefully... http://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse-plugin-1.1 -deployable-RC7.zip On Jul 11, 2006, at 10:03 AM, Sachin Patel wrote: &[EMAIL PROTECTED] ok ignore rc6 On Jul 11, 2006, at 9:59 AM, Kevan Miller wrote: On Jul 11, 2006, at 8:41 AM, Sachin Patel wrote: On Jul 10, 2006, at 11:29 PM, Kevan Miller wrote: Sachin, At a minimum, you need to add: OpenEJB, MX4J, and XStream to the root LICENSE file Which root license file I you referring to? Do I just append each license to this? By root, I meant the notice and license files in g-eclipse-plugin-1-1/META-INF/. I actually don't think that they should be in the META-INF dir. I think you should end up with the following when you unzip: geronimo-eclipse-plugin-1-1/LICENSE geronimo-eclipse-plugin-1-1/NOTICE (both license and notice should either be .txt or have no suffix) geronimo-eclipse-plugin-1-1/plugins/... geronimo-eclipse-plugin-1-1/features/... The additional license and notice information should be appended to the ASL license and notice info. see geronimo/branches/modules/scripts/src/resources/LICENSE.txt and NOTICE.txt (you can just steal the appropriate sections from these files). Looks like some of the jar files are still missing LICENSE and NOTICE files. org.apache.geronimo.v11.deployment.model.edit_1.0.0.jar, for instance. --kevan MX4J, and XMLBeans to the root NOTICE file Again which root? Did you investigate Hessian licensing? Yeah its under Apache 1.0 I think, but could not find a copy of it on their site. I didn't find any licensing info (at first). So, took a look at the source. The first source file I looked at contained the following: /* * Copyright (c) 1998-2004 Caucho Technology -- all rights reserved * * This file is part of Resin(R) Open Source * * Each copy or derived work must preserve the copyright notice and this * notice unmodified. * * Resin Open Source is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by * the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or * (at your option) any later version. * * Resin Open Source is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, or any warranty * of NON-INFRINGEMENT. See the GNU General Public License for more * details. * * You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License * along with Resin Open Source; if not, write to the * Free SoftwareFoundation, Inc. * 59 Temple Place, Suite 330 * Boston, MA 02111-1307 USA * * @author Scott Ferguson */ I now see the following statement on their wiki: "Caucho Technology has released this Hessian implementation under an open source license (the Apache license). Anyone may fre
Re: [Vote] Geronimo Eclipse Plugin v1.1.0
On Jul 11, 2006, at 4:09 PM, Sachin Patel wrote:FYI the current vote is on.. (breaking the all time software record on the number of release candidate drivers in one day)http://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse-plugin-1.1-deployable-RC10.zipSachin, All the license/notices look good. I created/started a server; created, deployed and tested a jsp. Looks good to me. Nice work!Here's my non-binding +1.--kevan
RE: [Vote] Geronimo Eclipse Plugin v1.1.0
I just checked the g-eclipse-plugin-1.1-updatesite-RC5.zip file and only see Apache License there (not the full Apache 2.0 license) in all 3 features. It might be important to correct the license in these features as installing via update manager is the recommended method to install the Eclipse plugin. In Eclipse, user will have to accept the licenses in install panel before the Eclipse continues the installation. Lin -Original Message- From: Sachin Patel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sachin Patel Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2006 12:58 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Vote] Geronimo Eclipse Plugin v1.1.0 Ok one last time hopefully... http://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse-plugin-1.1-deployable-RC7.zip On Jul 11, 2006, at 10:03 AM, Sachin Patel wrote: &[EMAIL PROTECTED] ok ignore rc6 On Jul 11, 2006, at 9:59 AM, Kevan Miller wrote: On Jul 11, 2006, at 8:41 AM, Sachin Patel wrote: On Jul 10, 2006, at 11:29 PM, Kevan Miller wrote: Sachin, At a minimum, you need to add: OpenEJB, MX4J, and XStream to the root LICENSE file Which root license file I you referring to? Do I just append each license to this? By root, I meant the notice and license files in g-eclipse-plugin-1-1/META-INF/. I actually don't think that they should be in the META-INF dir. I think you should end up with the following when you unzip: geronimo-eclipse-plugin-1-1/LICENSE geronimo-eclipse-plugin-1-1/NOTICE (both license and notice should either be .txt or have no suffix) geronimo-eclipse-plugin-1-1/plugins/... geronimo-eclipse-plugin-1-1/features/... The additional license and notice information should be appended to the ASL license and notice info. see geronimo/branches/modules/scripts/src/resources/LICENSE.txt and NOTICE.txt (you can just steal the appropriate sections from these files). Looks like some of the jar files are still missing LICENSE and NOTICE files. org.apache.geronimo.v11.deployment.model.edit_1.0.0.jar, for instance. --kevan MX4J, and XMLBeans to the root NOTICE file Again which root? Did you investigate Hessian licensing? Yeah its under Apache 1.0 I think, but could not find a copy of it on their site. I didn't find any licensing info (at first). So, took a look at the source. The first source file I looked at contained the following: /* * Copyright (c) 1998-2004 Caucho Technology -- all rights reserved * * This file is part of Resin(R) Open Source * * Each copy or derived work must preserve the copyright notice and this * notice unmodified. * * Resin Open Source is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by * the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or * (at your option) any later version. * * Resin Open Source is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, or any warranty * of NON-INFRINGEMENT. See the GNU General Public License for more * details. * * You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License * along with Resin Open Source; if not, write to the * Free SoftwareFoundation, Inc. * 59 Temple Place, Suite 330 * Boston, MA 02111-1307 USA * * @author Scott Ferguson */ I now see the following statement on their wiki: "Caucho Technology has released this Hessian implementation under an open source license (the Apache license). Anyone may freely download, use, and redistribute the Hessian implementation." But that's the strongest source of licensing info, that I've found... --kevan On Jul 10, 2006, at 10:42 PM, Sachin Patel wrote: Fixed. Re-vote. http://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse-plugin-1.1-deployable-RC5.zip http://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse-plugin-1.1-updatesite-RC5.zip (still uploading available shortly) On Jul 10, 2006, at 8:21 PM, Kevan Miller wrote: Sachin, I'm afraid I don't see either a NOTICE or LICENSE files in the plugin zip file, itself, nor any of the embedded jar files. They all must contain both LICENSE and NOTICE files. Afraid this is a requirement. And you'll need to create new binaries... See http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#what-must-every-release-contain for more information. We should be able to reuse some of the license information we generated for
Re: [Vote] Geronimo Eclipse Plugin v1.1.0
This will be properly documented in the release notes but cannot change this in the code stream.On Jul 11, 2006, at 1:15 PM, Lin Sun wrote:I would prefer some statement on the Geronimo server configuration panel to state that this function is not feature complete and works only with static html pages. This was not clear to me and I am sure others will run into same issues as well. I don’t think I would want to enable this test environment for now. P.S I also found out the deploy list-modules output has been changed after I checked the two checkboxes: deploy.bat list-modulesFound 39 modules + default/eclipse-config-store/1.0/car on geronimo/j2ee-system/1.1/car?ServiceModule=geronimo/j2ee-system/1.1/car,j2eeType=ConfigurationStore,name=Local + geronimo/activemq/1.1/car on geronimo/j2ee-system/1.1/car?ServiceModule=geronimo/j2ee-system/1.1/car,j2eeType=ConfigurationStore,name=Local + geronimo/activemq-broker/1.1/car on geronimo/j2ee-system/1.1/car?ServiceModule=geronimo/j2ee-system/1.1/car,j2eeType=ConfigurationStore,name=Local… Thanks, Lin -Original Message-From: Sachin Patel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Sachin PatelSent: Tuesday, July 11, 2006 8:32 AMTo: [email protected]: Re: [Vote] Geronimo Eclipse Plugin v1.1.0 As I mentioned earlier the test environment mode is not feature complete and it only works in the one scenario I mentioned. On Jul 10, 2006, at 11:28 PM, Lin Sun wrote:I started to have problems in deploying my second application which I had itrunning with v1.0's plugin. It is a simple ClassViewer application thathas a jsp and a servlet. The jsp calls the servlet when user clicks on thesubmit button to get the class description. Upon deployment of the application, I got the following CNP exception whenthe two checkboxes (Enable in-place deployment & Run standalone modulesdirectly from workspace) are checked: Caused by: java.lang.ClassNotFoundException: samples.cviewer.ClassViewerServlet inclassloader samples/cviewer/1.1/war at java.lang.Throwable.(Throwable.java:57) at java.lang.Throwable.(Throwable.java:81) atjava.lang.ClassNotFoundException.(ClassNotFoundException.java:80) atorg.apache.geronimo.kernel.config.MultiParentClassLoader.loadClass(MultiParentClassLoader.java:249) at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:561) atorg.apache.geronimo.tomcat.GeronimoStandardContext.addChild(GeronimoStandardContext.java:234) ... 84 more I have gotten this error before(https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=123803) in v1.0 but I don'tthink this is the same prob as I had before this time. I noticed that in my project's .classpath file, I have: However, I don't have the servlet class in that directory. I tried toupdate it to the path where the servlet class is located (ImportedClasses/samples/cviewer) but still the same error. I'll look into more of this but I thought I'd let everyone know since it isvoting time of the plugin. P.S. Later on I discovered that the sample works fine when I don't have thetwo checkboxes checked. I can see the servlet and jsp in the goodstructure in the repo. Lin -Original Message-From: Sachin Patel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Sachin PatelSent: Sunday, July 09, 2006 4:25 PMTo: [email protected]: [Vote] Geronimo Eclipse Plugin v1.1.0 The following distributions of the Geronimo Eclipse plugin are ready to be voted on for final release. Since binding votes are needed, each PMC member if possible, please cast your vote within 72 hours. http://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse- plugin-1.1-deployable-RC4.ziphttp://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse- plugin-1.1-updatesite-RC4.zip Here is my +1. - sachin -sachin -sachin
RE: [Vote] Geronimo Eclipse Plugin v1.1.0
I would prefer some statement on the Geronimo server configuration panel to state that this function is not feature complete and works only with static html pages. This was not clear to me and I am sure others will run into same issues as well. I don’t think I would want to enable this test environment for now. P.S I also found out the deploy list-modules output has been changed after I checked the two checkboxes: deploy.bat list-modules Found 39 modules + default/eclipse-config-store/1.0/car on geronimo/j2ee-system/1.1/car?Service Module=geronimo/j2ee-system/1.1/car,j2eeType=ConfigurationStore,name=Local + geronimo/activemq/1.1/car on geronimo/j2ee-system/1.1/car?ServiceModule=gero nimo/j2ee-system/1.1/car,j2eeType=ConfigurationStore,name=Local + geronimo/activemq-broker/1.1/car on geronimo/j2ee-system/1.1/car?ServiceModu le=geronimo/j2ee-system/1.1/car,j2eeType=ConfigurationStore,name=Local … Thanks, Lin -Original Message- From: Sachin Patel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sachin Patel Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2006 8:32 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Vote] Geronimo Eclipse Plugin v1.1.0 As I mentioned earlier the test environment mode is not feature complete and it only works in the one scenario I mentioned. On Jul 10, 2006, at 11:28 PM, Lin Sun wrote: I started to have problems in deploying my second application which I had it running with v1.0's plugin. It is a simple ClassViewer application that has a jsp and a servlet. The jsp calls the servlet when user clicks on the submit button to get the class description. Upon deployment of the application, I got the following CNP exception when the two checkboxes (Enable in-place deployment & Run standalone modules directly from workspace) are checked: Caused by: java.lang.ClassNotFoundException: samples.cviewer.ClassViewerServlet in classloader samples/cviewer/1.1/war at java.lang.Throwable.(Throwable.java:57) at java.lang.Throwable.(Throwable.java:81) at java.lang.ClassNotFoundException.(ClassNotFoundException.java:80) at org.apache.geronimo.kernel.config.MultiParentClassLoader.loadClass(MultiPare ntClassLoader.java:249) at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:561) at org.apache.geronimo.tomcat.GeronimoStandardContext.addChild(GeronimoStandard Context.java:234) ... 84 more I have gotten this error before (https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=123803) in v1.0 but I don't think this is the same prob as I had before this time. I noticed that in my project's .classpath file, I have: However, I don't have the servlet class in that directory. I tried to update it to the path where the servlet class is located (ImportedClasses /samples/cviewer) but still the same error. I'll look into more of this but I thought I'd let everyone know since it is voting time of the plugin. P.S. Later on I discovered that the sample works fine when I don't have the two checkboxes checked. I can see the servlet and jsp in the good structure in the repo. Lin -Original Message- From: Sachin Patel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Sachin Patel Sent: Sunday, July 09, 2006 4:25 PM To: [email protected] Subject: [Vote] Geronimo Eclipse Plugin v1.1.0 The following distributions of the Geronimo Eclipse plugin are ready to be voted on for final release. Since binding votes are needed, each PMC member if possible, please cast your vote within 72 hours. http://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse- plugin-1.1-deployable-RC4.zip http://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse- plugin-1.1-updatesite-RC4.zip Here is my +1. - sachin -sachin
Re: [Vote] Geronimo Eclipse Plugin v1.1.0
Ok one last time hopefully...http://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse-plugin-1.1-deployable-RC7.zipOn Jul 11, 2006, at 10:03 AM, Sachin Patel wrote:&[EMAIL PROTECTED] ok ignore rc6On Jul 11, 2006, at 9:59 AM, Kevan Miller wrote:On Jul 11, 2006, at 8:41 AM, Sachin Patel wrote:On Jul 10, 2006, at 11:29 PM, Kevan Miller wrote:Sachin,At a minimum, you need to add:OpenEJB, MX4J, and XStream to the root LICENSE fileWhich root license file I you referring to? Do I just append each license to this?By root, I meant the notice and license files in g-eclipse-plugin-1-1/META-INF/. I actually don't think that they should be in the META-INF dir. I think you should end up with the following when you unzip:geronimo-eclipse-plugin-1-1/LICENSEgeronimo-eclipse-plugin-1-1/NOTICE (both license and notice should either be .txt or have no suffix)geronimo-eclipse-plugin-1-1/plugins/...geronimo-eclipse-plugin-1-1/features/...The additional license and notice information should be appended to the ASL license and notice info. see geronimo/branches/modules/scripts/src/resources/LICENSE.txt and NOTICE.txt (you can just steal the appropriate sections from these files).Looks like some of the jar files are still missing LICENSE and NOTICE files. org.apache.geronimo.v11.deployment.model.edit_1.0.0.jar, for instance.--kevan MX4J, and XMLBeans to the root NOTICE fileAgain which root?Did you investigate Hessian licensing? Yeah its under Apache 1.0 I think, but could not find a copy of it on their site.I didn't find any licensing info (at first). So, took a look at the source. The first source file I looked at contained the following:/* * Copyright (c) 1998-2004 Caucho Technology -- all rights reserved * * This file is part of Resin(R) Open Source * * Each copy or derived work must preserve the copyright notice and this * notice unmodified. * * Resin Open Source is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by * the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or * (at your option) any later version. * * Resin Open Source is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, or any warranty * of NON-INFRINGEMENT. See the GNU General Public License for more * details. * * You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License * along with Resin Open Source; if not, write to the * Free SoftwareFoundation, Inc. * 59 Temple Place, Suite 330 * Boston, MA 02111-1307 USA * * @author Scott Ferguson */I now see the following statement on their wiki:"Caucho Technology has released this Hessian implementation under an open source license (the Apache license). Anyone may freely download, use, and redistribute the Hessian implementation."But that's the strongest source of licensing info, that I've found...--kevanOn Jul 10, 2006, at 10:42 PM, Sachin Patel wrote:Fixed. Re-vote.http://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse-plugin-1.1-deployable-RC5.ziphttp://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse-plugin-1.1-updatesite-RC5.zip (still uploading available shortly)On Jul 10, 2006, at 8:21 PM, Kevan Miller wrote:Sachin,I'm afraid I don't see either a NOTICE or LICENSE files in the plugin zip file, itself, nor any of the embedded jar files. They all must contain both LICENSE and NOTICE files. Afraid this is a requirement. And you'll need to create new binaries... See http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#what-must-every-release-contain for more information.We should be able to reuse some of the license information we generated for G 1.1. I'm happy to help with that. I'm not sure how we're putting the NOTICE and LICENSE info in each of the jar files. Shouldn't be too hard to figure out, but perhaps someone can chime in...--kevanOn Jul 9, 2006, at 4:24 PM, Sachin Patel wrote: The following distributions of the Geronimo Eclipse plugin are ready to be voted on for final release. Since binding votes are needed, each PMC member if possible, please cast your vote within 72 hours.http://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse-plugin-1.1-deployable-RC4.ziphttp://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse-plugin-1.1-updatesite-RC4.zipHere is my +1.- sachin -sachin -sachin -sachin -sachin
Re: [Vote] Geronimo Eclipse Plugin v1.1.0
I would like to see this tool released, but I'm not an Eclipse user so I won't be able to give it a reasonable test. +0, I guess. :) Thanks, Aaron On 7/11/06, Sachin Patel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: &[EMAIL PROTECTED] ok ignore rc6 On Jul 11, 2006, at 9:59 AM, Kevan Miller wrote: On Jul 11, 2006, at 8:41 AM, Sachin Patel wrote: On Jul 10, 2006, at 11:29 PM, Kevan Miller wrote: Sachin, At a minimum, you need to add: OpenEJB, MX4J, and XStream to the root LICENSE file Which root license file I you referring to? Do I just append each license to this? By root, I meant the notice and license files in g-eclipse-plugin-1-1/META-INF/. I actually don't think that they should be in the META-INF dir. I think you should end up with the following when you unzip: geronimo-eclipse-plugin-1-1/LICENSE geronimo-eclipse-plugin-1-1/NOTICE (both license and notice should either be .txt or have no suffix) geronimo-eclipse-plugin-1-1/plugins/... geronimo-eclipse-plugin-1-1/features/... The additional license and notice information should be appended to the ASL license and notice info. see geronimo/branches/modules/scripts/src/resources/LICENSE.txt and NOTICE.txt (you can just steal the appropriate sections from these files). Looks like some of the jar files are still missing LICENSE and NOTICE files. org.apache.geronimo.v11.deployment.model.edit_1.0.0.jar, for instance. --kevan MX4J, and XMLBeans to the root NOTICE file Again which root? Did you investigate Hessian licensing? Yeah its under Apache 1.0 I think, but could not find a copy of it on their site. I didn't find any licensing info (at first). So, took a look at the source. The first source file I looked at contained the following: /* * Copyright (c) 1998-2004 Caucho Technology -- all rights reserved * * This file is part of Resin(R) Open Source * * Each copy or derived work must preserve the copyright notice and this * notice unmodified. * * Resin Open Source is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by * the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or * (at your option) any later version. * * Resin Open Source is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, or any warranty * of NON-INFRINGEMENT. See the GNU General Public License for more * details. * * You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License * along with Resin Open Source; if not, write to the * Free SoftwareFoundation, Inc. * 59 Temple Place, Suite 330 * Boston, MA 02111-1307 USA * * @author Scott Ferguson */ I now see the following statement on their wiki: "Caucho Technology has released this Hessian implementation under an open source license (the Apache license). Anyone may freely download, use, and redistribute the Hessian implementation." But that's the strongest source of licensing info, that I've found... --kevan On Jul 10, 2006, at 10:42 PM, Sachin Patel wrote: Fixed. Re-vote. http://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse-plugin-1.1-deployable-RC5.zip http://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse-plugin-1.1-updatesite-RC5.zip (still uploading available shortly) On Jul 10, 2006, at 8:21 PM, Kevan Miller wrote: Sachin, I'm afraid I don't see either a NOTICE or LICENSE files in the plugin zip file, itself, nor any of the embedded jar files. They all must contain both LICENSE and NOTICE files. Afraid this is a requirement. And you'll need to create new binaries... See http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#what-must-every-release-contain for more information. We should be able to reuse some of the license information we generated for G 1.1. I'm happy to help with that. I'm not sure how we're putting the NOTICE and LICENSE info in each of the jar files. Shouldn't be too hard to figure out, but perhaps someone can chime in... --kevan On Jul 9, 2006, at 4:24 PM, Sachin Patel wrote: The following distributions of the Geronimo Eclipse plugin are ready to be voted on for final release. Since binding votes are needed, each PMC member if possible, please cast your vote within 72 hours. http://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse-plugin-1.1-deployable-RC4.zip http://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse-plugin-1.1-updatesite-RC4.zip Here is my +1. - sachin -sachin -sachin -sachin
Re: [Vote] Geronimo Eclipse Plugin v1.1.0
&[EMAIL PROTECTED] ok ignore rc6On Jul 11, 2006, at 9:59 AM, Kevan Miller wrote:On Jul 11, 2006, at 8:41 AM, Sachin Patel wrote:On Jul 10, 2006, at 11:29 PM, Kevan Miller wrote:Sachin,At a minimum, you need to add:OpenEJB, MX4J, and XStream to the root LICENSE fileWhich root license file I you referring to? Do I just append each license to this?By root, I meant the notice and license files in g-eclipse-plugin-1-1/META-INF/. I actually don't think that they should be in the META-INF dir. I think you should end up with the following when you unzip:geronimo-eclipse-plugin-1-1/LICENSEgeronimo-eclipse-plugin-1-1/NOTICE (both license and notice should either be .txt or have no suffix)geronimo-eclipse-plugin-1-1/plugins/...geronimo-eclipse-plugin-1-1/features/...The additional license and notice information should be appended to the ASL license and notice info. see geronimo/branches/modules/scripts/src/resources/LICENSE.txt and NOTICE.txt (you can just steal the appropriate sections from these files).Looks like some of the jar files are still missing LICENSE and NOTICE files. org.apache.geronimo.v11.deployment.model.edit_1.0.0.jar, for instance.--kevan MX4J, and XMLBeans to the root NOTICE fileAgain which root?Did you investigate Hessian licensing? Yeah its under Apache 1.0 I think, but could not find a copy of it on their site.I didn't find any licensing info (at first). So, took a look at the source. The first source file I looked at contained the following:/* * Copyright (c) 1998-2004 Caucho Technology -- all rights reserved * * This file is part of Resin(R) Open Source * * Each copy or derived work must preserve the copyright notice and this * notice unmodified. * * Resin Open Source is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by * the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or * (at your option) any later version. * * Resin Open Source is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, or any warranty * of NON-INFRINGEMENT. See the GNU General Public License for more * details. * * You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License * along with Resin Open Source; if not, write to the * Free SoftwareFoundation, Inc. * 59 Temple Place, Suite 330 * Boston, MA 02111-1307 USA * * @author Scott Ferguson */I now see the following statement on their wiki:"Caucho Technology has released this Hessian implementation under an open source license (the Apache license). Anyone may freely download, use, and redistribute the Hessian implementation."But that's the strongest source of licensing info, that I've found...--kevanOn Jul 10, 2006, at 10:42 PM, Sachin Patel wrote:Fixed. Re-vote.http://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse-plugin-1.1-deployable-RC5.ziphttp://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse-plugin-1.1-updatesite-RC5.zip (still uploading available shortly)On Jul 10, 2006, at 8:21 PM, Kevan Miller wrote:Sachin,I'm afraid I don't see either a NOTICE or LICENSE files in the plugin zip file, itself, nor any of the embedded jar files. They all must contain both LICENSE and NOTICE files. Afraid this is a requirement. And you'll need to create new binaries... See http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#what-must-every-release-contain for more information.We should be able to reuse some of the license information we generated for G 1.1. I'm happy to help with that. I'm not sure how we're putting the NOTICE and LICENSE info in each of the jar files. Shouldn't be too hard to figure out, but perhaps someone can chime in...--kevanOn Jul 9, 2006, at 4:24 PM, Sachin Patel wrote: The following distributions of the Geronimo Eclipse plugin are ready to be voted on for final release. Since binding votes are needed, each PMC member if possible, please cast your vote within 72 hours.http://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse-plugin-1.1-deployable-RC4.ziphttp://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse-plugin-1.1-updatesite-RC4.zipHere is my +1.- sachin -sachin -sachin -sachin
[Re-Vote] Geronimo Eclipse Plugin v1.1.0
Added, please revote.http://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse-plugin-1.1-deployable-RC6.zipOn Jul 10, 2006, at 11:29 PM, Kevan Miller wrote:Sachin,At a minimum, you need to add:OpenEJB, MX4J, and XStream to the root LICENSE fileMX4J, and XMLBeans to the root NOTICE fileDid you investigate Hessian licensing? I didn't find any licensing info (at first). So, took a look at the source. The first source file I looked at contained the following:/* * Copyright (c) 1998-2004 Caucho Technology -- all rights reserved * * This file is part of Resin(R) Open Source * * Each copy or derived work must preserve the copyright notice and this * notice unmodified. * * Resin Open Source is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by * the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or * (at your option) any later version. * * Resin Open Source is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, or any warranty * of NON-INFRINGEMENT. See the GNU General Public License for more * details. * * You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License * along with Resin Open Source; if not, write to the * Free SoftwareFoundation, Inc. * 59 Temple Place, Suite 330 * Boston, MA 02111-1307 USA * * @author Scott Ferguson */I now see the following statement on their wiki:"Caucho Technology has released this Hessian implementation under an open source license (the Apache license). Anyone may freely download, use, and redistribute the Hessian implementation."But that's the strongest source of licensing info, that I've found...--kevanOn Jul 10, 2006, at 10:42 PM, Sachin Patel wrote:Fixed. Re-vote.http://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse-plugin-1.1-deployable-RC5.ziphttp://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse-plugin-1.1-updatesite-RC5.zip (still uploading available shortly)On Jul 10, 2006, at 8:21 PM, Kevan Miller wrote:Sachin,I'm afraid I don't see either a NOTICE or LICENSE files in the plugin zip file, itself, nor any of the embedded jar files. They all must contain both LICENSE and NOTICE files. Afraid this is a requirement. And you'll need to create new binaries... See http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#what-must-every-release-contain for more information.We should be able to reuse some of the license information we generated for G 1.1. I'm happy to help with that. I'm not sure how we're putting the NOTICE and LICENSE info in each of the jar files. Shouldn't be too hard to figure out, but perhaps someone can chime in...--kevanOn Jul 9, 2006, at 4:24 PM, Sachin Patel wrote: The following distributions of the Geronimo Eclipse plugin are ready to be voted on for final release. Since binding votes are needed, each PMC member if possible, please cast your vote within 72 hours.http://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse-plugin-1.1-deployable-RC4.ziphttp://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse-plugin-1.1-updatesite-RC4.zipHere is my +1.- sachin -sachin -sachin
Re: [Vote] Geronimo Eclipse Plugin v1.1.0
On Jul 11, 2006, at 8:41 AM, Sachin Patel wrote:On Jul 10, 2006, at 11:29 PM, Kevan Miller wrote:Sachin,At a minimum, you need to add:OpenEJB, MX4J, and XStream to the root LICENSE fileWhich root license file I you referring to? Do I just append each license to this?By root, I meant the notice and license files in g-eclipse-plugin-1-1/META-INF/. I actually don't think that they should be in the META-INF dir. I think you should end up with the following when you unzip:geronimo-eclipse-plugin-1-1/LICENSEgeronimo-eclipse-plugin-1-1/NOTICE (both license and notice should either be .txt or have no suffix)geronimo-eclipse-plugin-1-1/plugins/...geronimo-eclipse-plugin-1-1/features/...The additional license and notice information should be appended to the ASL license and notice info. see geronimo/branches/modules/scripts/src/resources/LICENSE.txt and NOTICE.txt (you can just steal the appropriate sections from these files).Looks like some of the jar files are still missing LICENSE and NOTICE files. org.apache.geronimo.v11.deployment.model.edit_1.0.0.jar, for instance.--kevan MX4J, and XMLBeans to the root NOTICE fileAgain which root?Did you investigate Hessian licensing? Yeah its under Apache 1.0 I think, but could not find a copy of it on their site.I didn't find any licensing info (at first). So, took a look at the source. The first source file I looked at contained the following:/* * Copyright (c) 1998-2004 Caucho Technology -- all rights reserved * * This file is part of Resin(R) Open Source * * Each copy or derived work must preserve the copyright notice and this * notice unmodified. * * Resin Open Source is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by * the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or * (at your option) any later version. * * Resin Open Source is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, or any warranty * of NON-INFRINGEMENT. See the GNU General Public License for more * details. * * You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License * along with Resin Open Source; if not, write to the * Free SoftwareFoundation, Inc. * 59 Temple Place, Suite 330 * Boston, MA 02111-1307 USA * * @author Scott Ferguson */I now see the following statement on their wiki:"Caucho Technology has released this Hessian implementation under an open source license (the Apache license). Anyone may freely download, use, and redistribute the Hessian implementation."But that's the strongest source of licensing info, that I've found...--kevanOn Jul 10, 2006, at 10:42 PM, Sachin Patel wrote:Fixed. Re-vote.http://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse-plugin-1.1-deployable-RC5.ziphttp://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse-plugin-1.1-updatesite-RC5.zip (still uploading available shortly)On Jul 10, 2006, at 8:21 PM, Kevan Miller wrote:Sachin,I'm afraid I don't see either a NOTICE or LICENSE files in the plugin zip file, itself, nor any of the embedded jar files. They all must contain both LICENSE and NOTICE files. Afraid this is a requirement. And you'll need to create new binaries... See http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#what-must-every-release-contain for more information.We should be able to reuse some of the license information we generated for G 1.1. I'm happy to help with that. I'm not sure how we're putting the NOTICE and LICENSE info in each of the jar files. Shouldn't be too hard to figure out, but perhaps someone can chime in...--kevanOn Jul 9, 2006, at 4:24 PM, Sachin Patel wrote: The following distributions of the Geronimo Eclipse plugin are ready to be voted on for final release. Since binding votes are needed, each PMC member if possible, please cast your vote within 72 hours.http://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse-plugin-1.1-deployable-RC4.ziphttp://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse-plugin-1.1-updatesite-RC4.zipHere is my +1.- sachin -sachin -sachin
Re: [Vote] Geronimo Eclipse Plugin v1.1.0
As far as Hessian, I found the following note and appears the source files are incorrect...http://www.caucho.com/support/hessian-interest/0606/0002.htmlSo does this mean that I should add a copy of the Apache 1.1 license?On Jul 10, 2006, at 11:29 PM, Kevan Miller wrote:Sachin,At a minimum, you need to add:OpenEJB, MX4J, and XStream to the root LICENSE fileMX4J, and XMLBeans to the root NOTICE fileDid you investigate Hessian licensing? I didn't find any licensing info (at first). So, took a look at the source. The first source file I looked at contained the following:/* * Copyright (c) 1998-2004 Caucho Technology -- all rights reserved * * This file is part of Resin(R) Open Source * * Each copy or derived work must preserve the copyright notice and this * notice unmodified. * * Resin Open Source is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by * the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or * (at your option) any later version. * * Resin Open Source is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, or any warranty * of NON-INFRINGEMENT. See the GNU General Public License for more * details. * * You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License * along with Resin Open Source; if not, write to the * Free SoftwareFoundation, Inc. * 59 Temple Place, Suite 330 * Boston, MA 02111-1307 USA * * @author Scott Ferguson */I now see the following statement on their wiki:"Caucho Technology has released this Hessian implementation under an open source license (the Apache license). Anyone may freely download, use, and redistribute the Hessian implementation."But that's the strongest source of licensing info, that I've found...--kevanOn Jul 10, 2006, at 10:42 PM, Sachin Patel wrote:Fixed. Re-vote.http://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse-plugin-1.1-deployable-RC5.ziphttp://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse-plugin-1.1-updatesite-RC5.zip (still uploading available shortly)On Jul 10, 2006, at 8:21 PM, Kevan Miller wrote:Sachin,I'm afraid I don't see either a NOTICE or LICENSE files in the plugin zip file, itself, nor any of the embedded jar files. They all must contain both LICENSE and NOTICE files. Afraid this is a requirement. And you'll need to create new binaries... See http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#what-must-every-release-contain for more information.We should be able to reuse some of the license information we generated for G 1.1. I'm happy to help with that. I'm not sure how we're putting the NOTICE and LICENSE info in each of the jar files. Shouldn't be too hard to figure out, but perhaps someone can chime in...--kevanOn Jul 9, 2006, at 4:24 PM, Sachin Patel wrote: The following distributions of the Geronimo Eclipse plugin are ready to be voted on for final release. Since binding votes are needed, each PMC member if possible, please cast your vote within 72 hours.http://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse-plugin-1.1-deployable-RC4.ziphttp://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse-plugin-1.1-updatesite-RC4.zipHere is my +1.- sachin -sachin -sachin
Re: [Vote] Geronimo Eclipse Plugin v1.1.0
On Jul 10, 2006, at 11:29 PM, Kevan Miller wrote:Sachin,At a minimum, you need to add:OpenEJB, MX4J, and XStream to the root LICENSE fileWhich root license file I you referring to? Do I just append each license to this?MX4J, and XMLBeans to the root NOTICE fileAgain which root?Did you investigate Hessian licensing? Yeah its under Apache 1.0 I think, but could not find a copy of it on their site.I didn't find any licensing info (at first). So, took a look at the source. The first source file I looked at contained the following:/* * Copyright (c) 1998-2004 Caucho Technology -- all rights reserved * * This file is part of Resin(R) Open Source * * Each copy or derived work must preserve the copyright notice and this * notice unmodified. * * Resin Open Source is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by * the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or * (at your option) any later version. * * Resin Open Source is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, or any warranty * of NON-INFRINGEMENT. See the GNU General Public License for more * details. * * You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License * along with Resin Open Source; if not, write to the * Free SoftwareFoundation, Inc. * 59 Temple Place, Suite 330 * Boston, MA 02111-1307 USA * * @author Scott Ferguson */I now see the following statement on their wiki:"Caucho Technology has released this Hessian implementation under an open source license (the Apache license). Anyone may freely download, use, and redistribute the Hessian implementation."But that's the strongest source of licensing info, that I've found...--kevanOn Jul 10, 2006, at 10:42 PM, Sachin Patel wrote:Fixed. Re-vote.http://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse-plugin-1.1-deployable-RC5.ziphttp://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse-plugin-1.1-updatesite-RC5.zip (still uploading available shortly)On Jul 10, 2006, at 8:21 PM, Kevan Miller wrote:Sachin,I'm afraid I don't see either a NOTICE or LICENSE files in the plugin zip file, itself, nor any of the embedded jar files. They all must contain both LICENSE and NOTICE files. Afraid this is a requirement. And you'll need to create new binaries... See http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#what-must-every-release-contain for more information.We should be able to reuse some of the license information we generated for G 1.1. I'm happy to help with that. I'm not sure how we're putting the NOTICE and LICENSE info in each of the jar files. Shouldn't be too hard to figure out, but perhaps someone can chime in...--kevanOn Jul 9, 2006, at 4:24 PM, Sachin Patel wrote: The following distributions of the Geronimo Eclipse plugin are ready to be voted on for final release. Since binding votes are needed, each PMC member if possible, please cast your vote within 72 hours.http://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse-plugin-1.1-deployable-RC4.ziphttp://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse-plugin-1.1-updatesite-RC4.zipHere is my +1.- sachin -sachin -sachin
Re: [Vote] Geronimo Eclipse Plugin v1.1.0
As I mentioned earlier the test environment mode is not feature complete and it only works in the one scenario I mentioned.On Jul 10, 2006, at 11:28 PM, Lin Sun wrote:I started to have problems in deploying my second application which I had itrunning with v1.0's plugin. It is a simple ClassViewer application thathas a jsp and a servlet. The jsp calls the servlet when user clicks on thesubmit button to get the class description.Upon deployment of the application, I got the following CNP exception whenthe two checkboxes (Enable in-place deployment & Run standalone modulesdirectly from workspace) are checked:Caused by: java.lang.ClassNotFoundException: samples.cviewer.ClassViewerServlet inclassloader samples/cviewer/1.1/war at java.lang.Throwable.(Throwable.java:57) at java.lang.Throwable.(Throwable.java:81) atjava.lang.ClassNotFoundException.(ClassNotFoundException.java:80) atorg.apache.geronimo.kernel.config.MultiParentClassLoader.loadClass(MultiParentClassLoader.java:249) at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:561) atorg.apache.geronimo.tomcat.GeronimoStandardContext.addChild(GeronimoStandardContext.java:234) ... 84 moreI have gotten this error before(https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=123803) in v1.0 but I don'tthink this is the same prob as I had before this time. I noticed that in my project's .classpath file, I have:However, I don't have the servlet class in that directory. I tried toupdate it to the path where the servlet class is located (ImportedClasses/samples/cviewer) but still the same error. I'll look into more of this but I thought I'd let everyone know since it isvoting time of the plugin.P.S. Later on I discovered that the sample works fine when I don't have thetwo checkboxes checked. I can see the servlet and jsp in the goodstructure in the repo. Lin-Original Message-From: Sachin Patel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Sachin PatelSent: Sunday, July 09, 2006 4:25 PMTo: [email protected]: [Vote] Geronimo Eclipse Plugin v1.1.0The following distributions of the Geronimo Eclipse plugin are ready to be voted on for final release. Since binding votes are needed, each PMC member if possible, please cast your vote within 72 hours.http://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse- plugin-1.1-deployable-RC4.ziphttp://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse- plugin-1.1-updatesite-RC4.zipHere is my +1.- sachin -sachin
Re: [Vote] Geronimo Eclipse Plugin v1.1.0
Sachin,At a minimum, you need to add:OpenEJB, MX4J, and XStream to the root LICENSE fileMX4J, and XMLBeans to the root NOTICE fileDid you investigate Hessian licensing? I didn't find any licensing info (at first). So, took a look at the source. The first source file I looked at contained the following:/* * Copyright (c) 1998-2004 Caucho Technology -- all rights reserved * * This file is part of Resin(R) Open Source * * Each copy or derived work must preserve the copyright notice and this * notice unmodified. * * Resin Open Source is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by * the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or * (at your option) any later version. * * Resin Open Source is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, or any warranty * of NON-INFRINGEMENT. See the GNU General Public License for more * details. * * You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License * along with Resin Open Source; if not, write to the * Free SoftwareFoundation, Inc. * 59 Temple Place, Suite 330 * Boston, MA 02111-1307 USA * * @author Scott Ferguson */I now see the following statement on their wiki:"Caucho Technology has released this Hessian implementation under an open source license (the Apache license). Anyone may freely download, use, and redistribute the Hessian implementation."But that's the strongest source of licensing info, that I've found...--kevanOn Jul 10, 2006, at 10:42 PM, Sachin Patel wrote:Fixed. Re-vote.http://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse-plugin-1.1-deployable-RC5.ziphttp://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse-plugin-1.1-updatesite-RC5.zip (still uploading available shortly)On Jul 10, 2006, at 8:21 PM, Kevan Miller wrote:Sachin,I'm afraid I don't see either a NOTICE or LICENSE files in the plugin zip file, itself, nor any of the embedded jar files. They all must contain both LICENSE and NOTICE files. Afraid this is a requirement. And you'll need to create new binaries... See http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#what-must-every-release-contain for more information.We should be able to reuse some of the license information we generated for G 1.1. I'm happy to help with that. I'm not sure how we're putting the NOTICE and LICENSE info in each of the jar files. Shouldn't be too hard to figure out, but perhaps someone can chime in...--kevanOn Jul 9, 2006, at 4:24 PM, Sachin Patel wrote: The following distributions of the Geronimo Eclipse plugin are ready to be voted on for final release. Since binding votes are needed, each PMC member if possible, please cast your vote within 72 hours.http://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse-plugin-1.1-deployable-RC4.ziphttp://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse-plugin-1.1-updatesite-RC4.zipHere is my +1.- sachin -sachin
RE: [Vote] Geronimo Eclipse Plugin v1.1.0
I started to have problems in deploying my second application which I had it running with v1.0's plugin. It is a simple ClassViewer application that has a jsp and a servlet. The jsp calls the servlet when user clicks on the submit button to get the class description. Upon deployment of the application, I got the following CNP exception when the two checkboxes (Enable in-place deployment & Run standalone modules directly from workspace) are checked: Caused by: java.lang.ClassNotFoundException: samples.cviewer.ClassViewerServlet in classloader samples/cviewer/1.1/war at java.lang.Throwable.(Throwable.java:57) at java.lang.Throwable.(Throwable.java:81) at java.lang.ClassNotFoundException.(ClassNotFoundException.java:80) at org.apache.geronimo.kernel.config.MultiParentClassLoader.loadClass(MultiPare ntClassLoader.java:249) at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:561) at org.apache.geronimo.tomcat.GeronimoStandardContext.addChild(GeronimoStandard Context.java:234) ... 84 more I have gotten this error before (https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=123803) in v1.0 but I don't think this is the same prob as I had before this time. I noticed that in my project's .classpath file, I have: However, I don't have the servlet class in that directory. I tried to update it to the path where the servlet class is located (ImportedClasses /samples/cviewer) but still the same error. I'll look into more of this but I thought I'd let everyone know since it is voting time of the plugin. P.S. Later on I discovered that the sample works fine when I don't have the two checkboxes checked. I can see the servlet and jsp in the good structure in the repo. Lin -Original Message- From: Sachin Patel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sachin Patel Sent: Sunday, July 09, 2006 4:25 PM To: [email protected] Subject: [Vote] Geronimo Eclipse Plugin v1.1.0 The following distributions of the Geronimo Eclipse plugin are ready to be voted on for final release. Since binding votes are needed, each PMC member if possible, please cast your vote within 72 hours. http://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse- plugin-1.1-deployable-RC4.zip http://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse- plugin-1.1-updatesite-RC4.zip Here is my +1. - sachin
Re: [Vote] Geronimo Eclipse Plugin v1.1.0
Fixed. Re-vote.http://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse-plugin-1.1-deployable-RC5.ziphttp://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse-plugin-1.1-updatesite-RC5.zip (still uploading available shortly)On Jul 10, 2006, at 8:21 PM, Kevan Miller wrote:Sachin,I'm afraid I don't see either a NOTICE or LICENSE files in the plugin zip file, itself, nor any of the embedded jar files. They all must contain both LICENSE and NOTICE files. Afraid this is a requirement. And you'll need to create new binaries... See http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#what-must-every-release-contain for more information.We should be able to reuse some of the license information we generated for G 1.1. I'm happy to help with that. I'm not sure how we're putting the NOTICE and LICENSE info in each of the jar files. Shouldn't be too hard to figure out, but perhaps someone can chime in...--kevanOn Jul 9, 2006, at 4:24 PM, Sachin Patel wrote: The following distributions of the Geronimo Eclipse plugin are ready to be voted on for final release. Since binding votes are needed, each PMC member if possible, please cast your vote within 72 hours.http://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse-plugin-1.1-deployable-RC4.ziphttp://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse-plugin-1.1-updatesite-RC4.zipHere is my +1.- sachin -sachin
Re: [Vote] Geronimo Eclipse Plugin v1.1.0
Forget what I said... I'll add them.On Jul 10, 2006, at 9:41 PM, Sachin Patel wrote:Ok thanks, but a license is not needed for the update site zip as this is handled by the update manager. As far as the deployable plugin the licenses only need to be packaged within the features and not each individual plugin.On Jul 10, 2006, at 8:21 PM, Kevan Miller wrote:Sachin,I'm afraid I don't see either a NOTICE or LICENSE files in the plugin zip file, itself, nor any of the embedded jar files. They all must contain both LICENSE and NOTICE files. Afraid this is a requirement. And you'll need to create new binaries... See http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#what-must-every-release-contain for more information.We should be able to reuse some of the license information we generated for G 1.1. I'm happy to help with that. I'm not sure how we're putting the NOTICE and LICENSE info in each of the jar files. Shouldn't be too hard to figure out, but perhaps someone can chime in...--kevanOn Jul 9, 2006, at 4:24 PM, Sachin Patel wrote: The following distributions of the Geronimo Eclipse plugin are ready to be voted on for final release. Since binding votes are needed, each PMC member if possible, please cast your vote within 72 hours.http://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse-plugin-1.1-deployable-RC4.ziphttp://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse-plugin-1.1-updatesite-RC4.zipHere is my +1.- sachin -sachin -sachin
Re: [Vote] Geronimo Eclipse Plugin v1.1.0
Ok thanks, but a license is not needed for the update site zip as this is handled by the update manager. As far as the deployable plugin the licenses only need to be packaged within the features and not each individual plugin.On Jul 10, 2006, at 8:21 PM, Kevan Miller wrote:Sachin,I'm afraid I don't see either a NOTICE or LICENSE files in the plugin zip file, itself, nor any of the embedded jar files. They all must contain both LICENSE and NOTICE files. Afraid this is a requirement. And you'll need to create new binaries... See http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#what-must-every-release-contain for more information.We should be able to reuse some of the license information we generated for G 1.1. I'm happy to help with that. I'm not sure how we're putting the NOTICE and LICENSE info in each of the jar files. Shouldn't be too hard to figure out, but perhaps someone can chime in...--kevanOn Jul 9, 2006, at 4:24 PM, Sachin Patel wrote: The following distributions of the Geronimo Eclipse plugin are ready to be voted on for final release. Since binding votes are needed, each PMC member if possible, please cast your vote within 72 hours.http://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse-plugin-1.1-deployable-RC4.ziphttp://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse-plugin-1.1-updatesite-RC4.zipHere is my +1.- sachin -sachin
Re: [Vote] Geronimo Eclipse Plugin v1.1.0
Sachin, I'm afraid I don't see either a NOTICE or LICENSE files in the plugin zip file, itself, nor any of the embedded jar files. They all must contain both LICENSE and NOTICE files. Afraid this is a requirement. And you'll need to create new binaries... See http:// www.apache.org/dev/release.html#what-must-every-release-contain for more information. We should be able to reuse some of the license information we generated for G 1.1. I'm happy to help with that. I'm not sure how we're putting the NOTICE and LICENSE info in each of the jar files. Shouldn't be too hard to figure out, but perhaps someone can chime in... --kevan On Jul 9, 2006, at 4:24 PM, Sachin Patel wrote: The following distributions of the Geronimo Eclipse plugin are ready to be voted on for final release. Since binding votes are needed, each PMC member if possible, please cast your vote within 72 hours. http://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse- plugin-1.1-deployable-RC4.zip http://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse- plugin-1.1-updatesite-RC4.zip Here is my +1. - sachin
Re: [Vote] Geronimo Eclipse Plugin v1.1.0
On Jul 10, 2006, at 10:03 AM, Sachin Patel wrote:Ok thanks for the correction. So what classifies a veto?IIUC, only code (i.e. a commit) can be vetoed. If any license/legal-type issues are uncovered in the release, then that's probably a stop-release problem (effectively a veto). I think our goal should be to avoid releasing with any outstanding -1 votes, but it's not a requirement...--kevanOn Jul 10, 2006, at 9:54 AM, Kevan Miller wrote:On Jul 10, 2006, at 9:07 AM, Sachin Patel wrote:On Jul 10, 2006, at 5:16 AM, Jacek Laskowski wrote:On 7/10/06, Sachin Patel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: No critical reason, just a time frame on when I'll upload the driver to thedistribution size if no -1's have been casted. That's interesting...would that mean that if Geronimo 1.2 is about torelease only 72 hours matters or 3+ votes?Is it required that every PMC must vote? If not, then yes, I would think so. A released is only stopped if a -1 is received, not if people abstain from a vote.No, that's not right. A release is a majority vote. You can't "veto" a release with a -1. And, I think, there's no minimum vote requirement. Although if you only have 3 +1 votes, then I'd say something is probably wrong... 72 hours seems to be considered a minimum vote timeframe... I think we had something similar for some of the G 1.1 release votes...--kevan The first one just unzips into your ECLIPSE_HOME. Once released, the secondis the distribution that gets unzipped into the update manager site. Thepackaging is a little different. The second one can also be tested byunzipping anywhere on your filesystem and creating a "local" update site toit. The site.xml is not really needed to test it.Which one do I need to downloadand what are the steps to test it out? Just unpack to $ECLIPSE_HOMEdir? Just downloaded Eclipse 3.2 and am ready to give it a whirl.You can start with Eclipse 3.2 but will need to go to the update manager toadd WTP and its requirements. Or you can download the WTP-all in onepackage. I'm working as-we speak on a eclipse-plugin FAQ for the wiki thatwill contain further detailed info. Looking forward to reading it.Another question is about the naming - why is the plugin named -g-eclipse-... nor geronimo-eclipse-...?No reason. I can rename them. Keep in mind these zips are not the primary way of installation and only an alternate, as the recommended approach to installing is through the update manager.Jacek-- Jacek Laskowskihttp://www.laskowski.net.pl -sachin -sachin
Re: [Vote] Geronimo Eclipse Plugin v1.1.0
Ok thanks for the correction. So what classifies a veto?On Jul 10, 2006, at 9:54 AM, Kevan Miller wrote:On Jul 10, 2006, at 9:07 AM, Sachin Patel wrote:On Jul 10, 2006, at 5:16 AM, Jacek Laskowski wrote:On 7/10/06, Sachin Patel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: No critical reason, just a time frame on when I'll upload the driver to thedistribution size if no -1's have been casted. That's interesting...would that mean that if Geronimo 1.2 is about torelease only 72 hours matters or 3+ votes?Is it required that every PMC must vote? If not, then yes, I would think so. A released is only stopped if a -1 is received, not if people abstain from a vote.No, that's not right. A release is a majority vote. You can't "veto" a release with a -1. And, I think, there's no minimum vote requirement. Although if you only have 3 +1 votes, then I'd say something is probably wrong... 72 hours seems to be considered a minimum vote timeframe... I think we had something similar for some of the G 1.1 release votes...--kevan The first one just unzips into your ECLIPSE_HOME. Once released, the secondis the distribution that gets unzipped into the update manager site. Thepackaging is a little different. The second one can also be tested byunzipping anywhere on your filesystem and creating a "local" update site toit. The site.xml is not really needed to test it.Which one do I need to downloadand what are the steps to test it out? Just unpack to $ECLIPSE_HOMEdir? Just downloaded Eclipse 3.2 and am ready to give it a whirl.You can start with Eclipse 3.2 but will need to go to the update manager toadd WTP and its requirements. Or you can download the WTP-all in onepackage. I'm working as-we speak on a eclipse-plugin FAQ for the wiki thatwill contain further detailed info. Looking forward to reading it.Another question is about the naming - why is the plugin named -g-eclipse-... nor geronimo-eclipse-...?No reason. I can rename them. Keep in mind these zips are not the primary way of installation and only an alternate, as the recommended approach to installing is through the update manager.Jacek-- Jacek Laskowskihttp://www.laskowski.net.pl -sachin -sachin
Re: [Vote] Geronimo Eclipse Plugin v1.1.0
On Jul 10, 2006, at 9:07 AM, Sachin Patel wrote:On Jul 10, 2006, at 5:16 AM, Jacek Laskowski wrote:On 7/10/06, Sachin Patel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: No critical reason, just a time frame on when I'll upload the driver to thedistribution size if no -1's have been casted. That's interesting...would that mean that if Geronimo 1.2 is about torelease only 72 hours matters or 3+ votes?Is it required that every PMC must vote? If not, then yes, I would think so. A released is only stopped if a -1 is received, not if people abstain from a vote.No, that's not right. A release is a majority vote. You can't "veto" a release with a -1. And, I think, there's no minimum vote requirement. Although if you only have 3 +1 votes, then I'd say something is probably wrong... 72 hours seems to be considered a minimum vote timeframe... I think we had something similar for some of the G 1.1 release votes...--kevan The first one just unzips into your ECLIPSE_HOME. Once released, the secondis the distribution that gets unzipped into the update manager site. Thepackaging is a little different. The second one can also be tested byunzipping anywhere on your filesystem and creating a "local" update site toit. The site.xml is not really needed to test it.Which one do I need to downloadand what are the steps to test it out? Just unpack to $ECLIPSE_HOMEdir? Just downloaded Eclipse 3.2 and am ready to give it a whirl.You can start with Eclipse 3.2 but will need to go to the update manager toadd WTP and its requirements. Or you can download the WTP-all in onepackage. I'm working as-we speak on a eclipse-plugin FAQ for the wiki thatwill contain further detailed info. Looking forward to reading it.Another question is about the naming - why is the plugin named -g-eclipse-... nor geronimo-eclipse-...?No reason. I can rename them. Keep in mind these zips are not the primary way of installation and only an alternate, as the recommended approach to installing is through the update manager.Jacek-- Jacek Laskowskihttp://www.laskowski.net.pl -sachin
Re: [Vote] Geronimo Eclipse Plugin v1.1.0
On Jul 10, 2006, at 5:16 AM, Jacek Laskowski wrote:On 7/10/06, Sachin Patel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: No critical reason, just a time frame on when I'll upload the driver to thedistribution size if no -1's have been casted. That's interesting...would that mean that if Geronimo 1.2 is about torelease only 72 hours matters or 3+ votes?Is it required that every PMC must vote? If not, then yes, I would think so. A released is only stopped if a -1 is received, not if people abstain from a vote. The first one just unzips into your ECLIPSE_HOME. Once released, the secondis the distribution that gets unzipped into the update manager site. Thepackaging is a little different. The second one can also be tested byunzipping anywhere on your filesystem and creating a "local" update site toit. The site.xml is not really needed to test it.Which one do I need to downloadand what are the steps to test it out? Just unpack to $ECLIPSE_HOMEdir? Just downloaded Eclipse 3.2 and am ready to give it a whirl.You can start with Eclipse 3.2 but will need to go to the update manager toadd WTP and its requirements. Or you can download the WTP-all in onepackage. I'm working as-we speak on a eclipse-plugin FAQ for the wiki thatwill contain further detailed info. Looking forward to reading it.Another question is about the naming - why is the plugin named -g-eclipse-... nor geronimo-eclipse-...?No reason. I can rename them. Keep in mind these zips are not the primary way of installation and only an alternate, as the recommended approach to installing is through the update manager.Jacek-- Jacek Laskowskihttp://www.laskowski.net.pl -sachin
Re: [Vote] Geronimo Eclipse Plugin v1.1.0
On 7/10/06, Sachin Patel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: No critical reason, just a time frame on when I'll upload the driver to the distribution size if no -1's have been casted. That's interesting...would that mean that if Geronimo 1.2 is about to release only 72 hours matters or 3+ votes? The first one just unzips into your ECLIPSE_HOME. Once released, the second is the distribution that gets unzipped into the update manager site. The packaging is a little different. The second one can also be tested by unzipping anywhere on your filesystem and creating a "local" update site to it. The site.xml is not really needed to test it. Which one do I need to download and what are the steps to test it out? Just unpack to $ECLIPSE_HOME dir? Just downloaded Eclipse 3.2 and am ready to give it a whirl. You can start with Eclipse 3.2 but will need to go to the update manager to add WTP and its requirements. Or you can download the WTP-all in one package. I'm working as-we speak on a eclipse-plugin FAQ for the wiki that will contain further detailed info. Looking forward to reading it. Another question is about the naming - why is the plugin named - g-eclipse-... nor geronimo-eclipse-...? Jacek -- Jacek Laskowski http://www.laskowski.net.pl
Re: [Vote] Geronimo Eclipse Plugin v1.1.0
On Jul 9, 2006, at 6:12 PM, Jacek Laskowski wrote:On 7/9/06, Sachin Patel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: The following distributions of the Geronimo Eclipse plugin are readyto be voted on for final release. Since binding votes are needed,each PMC member if possible, please cast your vote within 72 hours. Why has the 72-hour vote period been set?No critical reason, just a time frame on when I'll upload the driver to the distribution size if no -1's have been casted. http://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse-plugin-1.1-deployable-RC4.ziphttp://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse-plugin-1.1-updatesite-RC4.zip What's the difference between them? The first one just unzips into your ECLIPSE_HOME. Once released, the second is the distribution that gets unzipped into the update manager site. The packaging is a little different. The second one can also be tested by unzipping anywhere on your filesystem and creating a "local" update site to it. The site.xml is not really needed to test it.Which one do I need to downloadand what are the steps to test it out? Just unpack to $ECLIPSE_HOMEdir? Just downloaded Eclipse 3.2 and am ready to give it a whirl.You can start with Eclipse 3.2 but will need to go to the update manager to add WTP and its requirements. Or you can download the WTP-all in one package. I'm working as-we speak on a eclipse-plugin FAQ for the wiki that will contain further detailed info. Jacek-- Jacek Laskowskihttp://www.laskowski.net.pl -sachin
Re: [Vote] Geronimo Eclipse Plugin v1.1.0
On 7/9/06, Sachin Patel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: The following distributions of the Geronimo Eclipse plugin are ready to be voted on for final release. Since binding votes are needed, each PMC member if possible, please cast your vote within 72 hours. Why has the 72-hour vote period been set? http://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse- plugin-1.1-deployable-RC4.zip http://people.apache.org/dist/geronimo/eclipse/unstable/g-eclipse- plugin-1.1-updatesite-RC4.zip What's the difference between them? Which one do I need to download and what are the steps to test it out? Just unpack to $ECLIPSE_HOME dir? Just downloaded Eclipse 3.2 and am ready to give it a whirl. Jacek -- Jacek Laskowski http://www.laskowski.net.pl
