Re: Jetspeed 1.6
Is there a problem wih cvs.apache.org, keep getting cannot connect to host Thanks Jon Raphaël Luta wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Taken from the Wiki Fusion runs JSR-168 Portlets inside of Jetspeed 1.6. To build Fusion, you need to first install and build Jetspeed-2. (building J2 will not be necessary with the final release and distribution of 1.6) When will the final release of 1.6 be ? Many thanks Jon David is currently working on it as a release manager. It currently undergoes a period of QA testing to ensure that the release will be as stable as possible. If you're interested, you can help us test the soon to be release by downloading the latest Jetspeed 1 CVS image and trying to build and run it. Make sure to report any problem you may encounter so that we may fix them before the release. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Jetspeed 1.6
I have retrieved the latest Jetspeed 1 from CVS, built it and have it running against Tomcat 5.0.28. How do I go bout deploying JSR-168 compliant portlets, I know in J2 you can drop the war file into J2, wahat about J1.6+Fusion. Thanks Jon Raphaël Luta wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Taken from the Wiki Fusion runs JSR-168 Portlets inside of Jetspeed 1.6. To build Fusion, you need to first install and build Jetspeed-2. (building J2 will not be necessary with the final release and distribution of 1.6) When will the final release of 1.6 be ? Many thanks Jon David is currently working on it as a release manager. It currently undergoes a period of QA testing to ensure that the release will be as stable as possible. If you're interested, you can help us test the soon to be release by downloading the latest Jetspeed 1 CVS image and trying to build and run it. Make sure to report any problem you may encounter so that we may fix them before the release. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Jetspeed 1.6
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Taken from the Wiki Fusion runs JSR-168 Portlets inside of Jetspeed 1.6. To build Fusion, you need to first install and build Jetspeed-2. (building J2 will not be necessary with the final release and distribution of 1.6) When will the final release of 1.6 be ? Many thanks Jon David is currently working on it as a release manager. It currently undergoes a period of QA testing to ensure that the release will be as stable as possible. If you're interested, you can help us test the soon to be release by downloading the latest Jetspeed 1 CVS image and trying to build and run it. Make sure to report any problem you may encounter so that we may fix them before the release. -- Raphaël Luta - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Apache Portals - Enterprise Portal in Java http://portals.apache.org/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Jetspeed 1.6
Thanks for the reply, will do as you suggested. Jon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Taken from the Wiki Fusion runs JSR-168 Portlets inside of Jetspeed 1.6. To build Fusion, you need to first install and build Jetspeed-2. (building J2 will not be necessary with the final release and distribution of 1.6) When will the final release of 1.6 be ? Many thanks Jon David is currently working on it as a release manager. It currently undergoes a period of QA testing to ensure that the release will be as stable as possible. If you're interested, you can help us test the soon to be release by downloading the latest Jetspeed 1 CVS image and trying to build and run it. Make sure to report any problem you may encounter so that we may fix them before the release. -- Raphaël Luta - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Apache Portals - Enterprise Portal in Java http://portals.apache.org/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Jetspeed 1.6-Fusion HELP!!!!
I'd like to give Jeff and Hema my support : first, we've chosen to start with JS1+Fusion as we had two major requirements : being JSR 168 compliant and have lots of nice features. This means that we obviously had to go with JS1+fusion (And i'm not talking about maturity). We plan to migrate in the future to JS2 but for us is the fusion alternative a perfect migration path and would be disastrous for us if fusion is deprecated. So I also give a -1 for such a deprecation ;) second, it seems to me that fusion code is not that large and could be quite easily put back on its feet. Code changes in J2 by Ate seem to be pragmatic and well founded and it reassured me that Ate took into account that fusion exists. finally I agree to have JS1.6.1 with JS2M2 release and JS1.6.2 with JS2final only if schedules can't match better. I mean : if JS2 is about to release final at about the same time that JS1.6, maybe could JS1.6 and JS2 be synchronised at first shot. Fabrice - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Jetspeed 1.6-Fusion HELP!!!!
Hi all, I just wanted to say that I also think that the work that went into Fusion is important on multiple levels : - first of all I integrate J2 with my product in a way very similar to what Fusion does, so if J2 changes a lot, I spend my time refactoring my code and understanding the changes, but this is my problem (btw currently I've frozen the version of J2 I use so that I can work on the integration) - Fusion is a great test case for using J2 as a component library, and I think that this has generally been a very good influence on the design of J2 - as other have said Fusion is a great migration path Anyway, I didn't have time to follow the whole refactoring work on deployment, but as long as it's able to deploy from a directory and maybe has a listener interface I think it should be ok. Regards, Serge Huber. David Sean Taylor wrote: Ate Douma wrote: I know and you know that I started in the new deployment branch from a clean sheet. I explicitly stated that this would *initially* result in some features gone missing. I also said these features have to be recreated once we decide this proposed new deployment model. Right now, I have had no formal acknowledgment from *anyone* yet to go ahead and commit my changes to the main branch. Here is my acknowledgement: resolve the Fusion issues before merging. Probably everybody does know though I definitely would like to see this happen, but I will be the first to acknowledge that it isn't ready for that yet. Me too And then of course the integration with the ServerManager. This will be quite easy to bring back online. Actually, I've already done so. I have the TomcatManager working again. Furthermore, I created a new (secured) ManagerServlet through which you can interact with the ApplicationManagerServer as well as the PortletApplicationManager. I've used the Tomcat ManagerServlet as example for this. Right now I can list, start, stop, unregister and undeploy a PortletApplication all from the commandline or webbrowser and working without problems. Providing the same features to Fusion will be a peace of cake. Great I'm still working on an deploy command (uploading a deployment object like a war or decorator). The basic code is already in place, the only thing left to implement is the uploading part in the new commandline tool (JetspeedConsole). I'm putting in a lot of effort to get this all working even *better* than it did before, and I'm going to provide as much effort as needed to get Fusion working again with the new deployment model, once we decided it will be the used for J2. Perhaps we should formally call a vote on the jetspeed-dev list: 1. deprecate fusion Nonsense I'll take that as a -1 on deprecating Fusion ;) -or-- 2. require developers to test fusion I do care about Fusion and, as far you *can* require that, I have no objection to make it a policy. We should think about an easier way to test fusion do though because getting J1 and J2 to build right beside each other is quite a hassle... Frankly the whole situation has led to me becoming less and less involved in Jetspeed as my contributions are devaluated. I think you are over reacting. I value your contributions very highly and I know I'm not alone ;-) You did a hell of a job (and I know it was a hell of a job) to integrate J2 with J1, AKA Fusion. I think it is one of the most important contributions to Jetspeed (as a whole, J1 and J2 together) because it not only provides a JSR-168 container but also a view of the power of J2 and a migration path for J1 users not (yet) ready to make the jump to J2. Well, we did everything except put out a release, and its long overdue. We need to figure out if we want to release 1.6 with: 2.0 M1 2.0 M2 2.0 Final Release We could do a 1.6.1 release with M2, 1.6.2 with the Final Release - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Jetspeed 1.6-Fusion HELP!!!!
My 1.6 Fusion build required me to add the tables from Jetspeed 1 and the tables from Jetspeed 2. I didn't try to remove any tables that might not be needed, but adding all of them works. Also, I have just downloaded the latest source for Jetspeed 2 and 1, compiled and deployed Fusion, and everything is working great. So I would suggest getting the latest source for both, unless someone higher up the chain disagrees. On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 10:07:12 -0600, Archana Turaga [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, We really need to know when Jetspeed 1.6 is going to be released. We need it more so because of its ability to support struts with Fusion and we are depending on it very heavily for our implementation. At the most we need to know what binaries from 2.0 are needed to get fusion going since Jetspeed 2.0 adds a whole bunch of tables to the database and we do not know which are needed and which are not. Please let us know the release date or at-least give us a list of binaries/tables that need to get fusion going on top of Jetspeed 1.6. I know David said that it will be out Feb end and I also know that you guys are all very busy but please can you let us know the status? Thanks a lot for your co-operation. Regards, Archana - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Jetspeed 1.6-Fusion HELP!!!!
Archana Turaga wrote: Hi, We really need to know when Jetspeed 1.6 is going to be released. We need it more so because of its ability to support struts with Fusion and we are depending on it very heavily for our implementation. At the most we need to know what binaries from 2.0 are needed to get fusion going since Jetspeed 2.0 adds a whole bunch of tables to the database and we do not know which are needed and which are not. Please let us know the release date or at-least give us a list of binaries/tables that need to get fusion going on top of Jetspeed 1.6. I know David said that it will be out Feb end and I also know that you guys are all very busy but please can you let us know the status? Thanks a lot for your co-operation. Regards, Archana Well we now have a new complication with Fusion. The CVS head for 2.0 will soon change its deployment model. In the deployment branch, quite a few interfaces that Fusion is dependent on are now deleted. The code doesn't even compile against this branch. Once again, J2 developers have no consideration for Fusion. Perhaps we should formally call a vote on the jetspeed-dev list: 1. deprecate fusion -or-- 2. require developers to test fusion Frankly the whole situation has led to me becoming less and less involved in Jetspeed as my contributions are devaluated. Anyway, enough of my whining. What we could do put out the 1.6 release with 2.0 M1 But since the deployment is changing in M2, this means that Fusion is stuck at M1 until someone comes along and refactors the Fusion deployment. Im open to suggestions -- David Sean Taylor Bluesunrise Software [EMAIL PROTECTED] [office] +01 707 773-4646 [mobile] +01 707 529 9194 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Jetspeed 1.6-Fusion HELP!!!!
Archana Turaga wrote: Thanks for the reply Jeff. But I know in the past they have said that when Jetspeed 1.6 is released you do not need to build Jetspeed 2.0. Won't that be really convenient...if it works that way? The 1.6 release will only require jars from Jetspeed 2.0 If that is M1 or M2 is yet to be determined... -- David Sean Taylor Bluesunrise Software [EMAIL PROTECTED] [office] +01 707 773-4646 [mobile] +01 707 529 9194 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Jetspeed 1.6-Fusion HELP!!!!
David, I definitely vote to support Fusion. My reasoning is that Jetspeed 1 is much more stable and complete than Jetspeed 2, even if the architecture is lacking. With Jetspeed 1 and the JSR 168 capabilities of 1.6 Fusion, we would have everything we need until 2 if finally finished. And I see I was not correct about the build being ok. After checking out the use-fusion.xml file, I see that Jetspeed 1 builds with the Jetspeed 2 M1 files that were still cached in Maven. Switching this to M2-dev does break the build. I, for one, highly value your work on Fusion. Without Fusion, we would have found another portal to work with, because JSR-168 is a high priority item for our portlets. Thank you, -- Jeff On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 10:52:54 -0800, David Sean Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Archana Turaga wrote: Thanks for the reply Jeff. But I know in the past they have said that when Jetspeed 1.6 is released you do not need to build Jetspeed 2.0. Won't that be really convenient...if it works that way? The 1.6 release will only require jars from Jetspeed 2.0 If that is M1 or M2 is yet to be determined... -- David Sean Taylor Bluesunrise Software [EMAIL PROTECTED] [office] +01 707 773-4646 [mobile] +01 707 529 9194 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Jetspeed 1.6-Fusion HELP!!!!
David, I too would like to echo what Jeff is talking about. For us too, Fusion was a must to get our struts portlet running, otherwise we were very much happy with what Jetspeed 1.5 offered. We are not yet ready to move to JS2, due to the changes from JS1.5. So Fusion is doing for us what JS2 has in the offing. My vote would be to not deprecate Fusion. P.S - Sorry to hear about your disappointment. We, the users of Jetspeed value your and the contributions of the developers here at Jetspeed, very much. Thanks. Thanks, Hema On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 13:43:04 -0600, Jeff Sheets [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: David, I definitely vote to support Fusion. My reasoning is that Jetspeed 1 is much more stable and complete than Jetspeed 2, even if the architecture is lacking. With Jetspeed 1 and the JSR 168 capabilities of 1.6 Fusion, we would have everything we need until 2 if finally finished. And I see I was not correct about the build being ok. After checking out the use-fusion.xml file, I see that Jetspeed 1 builds with the Jetspeed 2 M1 files that were still cached in Maven. Switching this to M2-dev does break the build. I, for one, highly value your work on Fusion. Without Fusion, we would have found another portal to work with, because JSR-168 is a high priority item for our portlets. Thank you, -- Jeff On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 10:52:54 -0800, David Sean Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Archana Turaga wrote: Thanks for the reply Jeff. But I know in the past they have said that when Jetspeed 1.6 is released you do not need to build Jetspeed 2.0. Won't that be really convenient...if it works that way? The 1.6 release will only require jars from Jetspeed 2.0 If that is M1 or M2 is yet to be determined... -- David Sean Taylor Bluesunrise Software [EMAIL PROTECTED] [office] +01 707 773-4646 [mobile] +01 707 529 9194 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- ~~ Hema Menon - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Jetspeed 1.6-Fusion HELP!!!!
Hi David, I completely agree with Hema and Jeff. I for one really need this combination going since this is going to be production software...otherwise I'm hosed. My vote also would be to not deprecate Fusion. I'm all for trying anything to get Jetspeed 1 with Fusion going. The news you gave us was very disappointing and unfortunate. I have been watching the mailing list for long (since that was the lifeline for me when I was working with 1.5 and now with Fusion) and I have seen how your contribution has been and I know it was valuable to me. Based on what you said I think at least get Jetspeed 1.6 out (since that is quiet stable and we do not have to worry about building it) and then next try to get the developers to test fusion. If that is not possible then release the binaries for fusion that are in M1 which work with Jetspeed 1.6so at least we are not lost. Also list out the known issues with Fusion so that we can get them addressed...somehow. There are a lot of people who are using 1.5 /1.6 and still need support. We and those people cannot be left in a lurch. I personally would at least try appealing to the developers to test Fusion and see if they can get that going. Thanks David for your replies. At least we know where we stand. And If you want we can all vote you in to show how valuable your contribution is...;-) Regards, Archana -Original Message- From: Hema Menon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2005 1:52 PM To: Jetspeed Users List; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Jetspeed 1.6-Fusion HELP David, I too would like to echo what Jeff is talking about. For us too, Fusion was a must to get our struts portlet running, otherwise we were very much happy with what Jetspeed 1.5 offered. We are not yet ready to move to JS2, due to the changes from JS1.5. So Fusion is doing for us what JS2 has in the offing. My vote would be to not deprecate Fusion. P.S - Sorry to hear about your disappointment. We, the users of Jetspeed value your and the contributions of the developers here at Jetspeed, very much. Thanks. Thanks, Hema On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 13:43:04 -0600, Jeff Sheets [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: David, I definitely vote to support Fusion. My reasoning is that Jetspeed 1 is much more stable and complete than Jetspeed 2, even if the architecture is lacking. With Jetspeed 1 and the JSR 168 capabilities of 1.6 Fusion, we would have everything we need until 2 if finally finished. And I see I was not correct about the build being ok. After checking out the use-fusion.xml file, I see that Jetspeed 1 builds with the Jetspeed 2 M1 files that were still cached in Maven. Switching this to M2-dev does break the build. I, for one, highly value your work on Fusion. Without Fusion, we would have found another portal to work with, because JSR-168 is a high priority item for our portlets. Thank you, -- Jeff On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 10:52:54 -0800, David Sean Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Archana Turaga wrote: Thanks for the reply Jeff. But I know in the past they have said that when Jetspeed 1.6 is released you do not need to build Jetspeed 2.0. Won't that be really convenient...if it works that way? The 1.6 release will only require jars from Jetspeed 2.0 If that is M1 or M2 is yet to be determined... -- David Sean Taylor Bluesunrise Software [EMAIL PROTECTED] [office] +01 707 773-4646 [mobile] +01 707 529 9194 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- ~~ Hema Menon - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Jetspeed 1.6-Fusion HELP!!!!
Thanks for the reply. What about the database tables those come along with Jetspeed 2.0 deployment? Are those all needed (they are the bunch of them) or only the 2.0 jars are enough to get fusion going? Regards, Archana -Original Message- From: David Sean Taylor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2005 12:53 PM To: Jetspeed Users List Subject: Re: Jetspeed 1.6-Fusion HELP Archana Turaga wrote: Thanks for the reply Jeff. But I know in the past they have said that when Jetspeed 1.6 is released you do not need to build Jetspeed 2.0. Won't that be really convenient...if it works that way? The 1.6 release will only require jars from Jetspeed 2.0 If that is M1 or M2 is yet to be determined... -- David Sean Taylor Bluesunrise Software [EMAIL PROTECTED] [office] +01 707 773-4646 [mobile] +01 707 529 9194 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Jetspeed 1.6-Fusion HELP!!!!
Archana Turaga wrote: Thanks for the reply. What about the database tables those come along with Jetspeed 2.0 deployment? Are those all needed (they are the bunch of them) or only the 2.0 jars are enough to get fusion going? The database tables are included in the Fusion build if you build with the Fusion option on. This is all not yet documented. Getting this documentation of course will delay the release schedule. If we (all of us interested in Fusion) decide to release Jetspeed 1.6 (which includes Fusion) with 2.0 M1, then there are going to be some new features added to Jetspeed 2.0 that will be missing, mainly some nice improvements in the Struts bridge. If we wait for the M2 release, we get all the bug fixes, but then the means a substantial bit of work to get deployment working again in Fusion. We're hoping for an M2 release by the end of this month, but its looking doubtful now. -- David Sean Taylor Bluesunrise Software [EMAIL PROTECTED] [office] +01 707 773-4646 [mobile] +01 707 529 9194 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Jetspeed 1.6-Fusion HELP!!!!
I believe the struts-bridge M2 version will work on the M1 release of Jetspeed 2, but someone will have to verify this for us. On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 12:51:10 -0800, David Sean Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Archana Turaga wrote: Thanks for the reply. What about the database tables those come along with Jetspeed 2.0 deployment? Are those all needed (they are the bunch of them) or only the 2.0 jars are enough to get fusion going? The database tables are included in the Fusion build if you build with the Fusion option on. This is all not yet documented. Getting this documentation of course will delay the release schedule. If we (all of us interested in Fusion) decide to release Jetspeed 1.6 (which includes Fusion) with 2.0 M1, then there are going to be some new features added to Jetspeed 2.0 that will be missing, mainly some nice improvements in the Struts bridge. If we wait for the M2 release, we get all the bug fixes, but then the means a substantial bit of work to get deployment working again in Fusion. We're hoping for an M2 release by the end of this month, but its looking doubtful now. -- David Sean Taylor Bluesunrise Software [EMAIL PROTECTED] [office] +01 707 773-4646 [mobile] +01 707 529 9194 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Jetspeed 1.6-Fusion HELP!!!!
I'm curious, which deployment refactoring has broken Fusion? Is it the things in Ate's branch or what is currently working in HEAD? -Scott -Original Message- From: David Sean Taylor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2005 3:51 PM To: Jetspeed Users List Subject: Re: Jetspeed 1.6-Fusion HELP Archana Turaga wrote: Thanks for the reply. What about the database tables those come along with Jetspeed 2.0 deployment? Are those all needed (they are the bunch of them) or only the 2.0 jars are enough to get fusion going? The database tables are included in the Fusion build if you build with the Fusion option on. This is all not yet documented. Getting this documentation of course will delay the release schedule. If we (all of us interested in Fusion) decide to release Jetspeed 1.6 (which includes Fusion) with 2.0 M1, then there are going to be some new features added to Jetspeed 2.0 that will be missing, mainly some nice improvements in the Struts bridge. If we wait for the M2 release, we get all the bug fixes, but then the means a substantial bit of work to get deployment working again in Fusion. We're hoping for an M2 release by the end of this month, but its looking doubtful now. -- David Sean Taylor Bluesunrise Software [EMAIL PROTECTED] [office] +01 707 773-4646 [mobile] +01 707 529 9194 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Jetspeed 1.6-Fusion HELP!!!!
David Sean Taylor wrote: Well we now have a new complication with Fusion. The CVS head for 2.0 will soon change its deployment model. In the deployment branch, quite a few interfaces that Fusion is dependent on are now deleted. The code doesn't even compile against this branch. Once again, J2 developers have no consideration for Fusion. This is a bold statement. I know and you know that I started in the new deployment branch from a clean sheet. I explicitly stated that this would *initially* result in some features gone missing. I also said these features have to be recreated once we decide this proposed new deployment model. Right now, I have had no formal acknowledgment from *anyone* yet to go ahead and commit my changes to the main branch. Probably everybody does know though I definitely would like to see this happen, but I will be the first to acknowledge that it isn't ready for that yet. Providing support back for undeployment, unregistration, registration, ServerManager integration, *AND FUSION* absolutely is a requirement I will stand for before moving to the new deployment model (if it comes to that). Now, I *did* look at Fusion when I started my deployment refactoring and how it is dependent on the current deployment features of J2. As far as I can tell (I'm no Fusion expert, I'll admit that), the currently missing features from the deployment branch are quite easy to replace, if not easier than it was initially (alright, maybe that's a bold statement of mine). The most prominent missing functionality in the new deployment branch for Fusion is the FilesystemPAM. All of its features (as used by Fusion) are now available from the new PortletApplicationManager. Maybe at first sight the deploy and undeploy features are still missing from it, but Fusion isn't actually using these methods, other than hooking into them to synchronize the J1 Registry. The new PortletApplicationManager registerPA and unregisterPA methods provide functionally the same hooks AFAIK. And then of course the integration with the ServerManager. This will be quite easy to bring back online. Actually, I've already done so. I have the TomcatManager working again. Furthermore, I created a new (secured) ManagerServlet through which you can interact with the ApplicationManagerServer as well as the PortletApplicationManager. I've used the Tomcat ManagerServlet as example for this. Right now I can list, start, stop, unregister and undeploy a PortletApplication all from the commandline or webbrowser and working without problems. Providing the same features to Fusion will be a peace of cake. I'm still working on an deploy command (uploading a deployment object like a war or decorator). The basic code is already in place, the only thing left to implement is the uploading part in the new commandline tool (JetspeedConsole). I'm putting in a lot of effort to get this all working even *better* than it did before, and I'm going to provide as much effort as needed to get Fusion working again with the new deployment model, once we decided it will be the used for J2. Perhaps we should formally call a vote on the jetspeed-dev list: 1. deprecate fusion Nonsense -or-- 2. require developers to test fusion I do care about Fusion and, as far you *can* require that, I have no objection to make it a policy. We should think about an easier way to test fusion do though because getting J1 and J2 to build right beside each other is quite a hassle... Frankly the whole situation has led to me becoming less and less involved in Jetspeed as my contributions are devaluated. I think you are over reacting. I value your contributions very highly and I know I'm not alone ;-) You did a hell of a job (and I know it was a hell of a job) to integrate J2 with J1, AKA Fusion. I think it is one of the most important contributions to Jetspeed (as a whole, J1 and J2 together) because it not only provides a JSR-168 container but also a view of the power of J2 and a migration path for J1 users not (yet) ready to make the jump to J2. As Jeff Sheets said in another response: J1 is much more stable and complete than J2. Fusion provides JSR-168 support *now* to end users of Jetspeed. Anyway, enough of my whining. ;-) What we could do put out the 1.6 release with 2.0 M1 But since the deployment is changing in M2, this means that Fusion is stuck at M1 until someone comes along and refactors the Fusion deployment. As I said above, I'm more than willing to do so. Doing that with your help would make it much quicker and easier though. Regards, Ate Im open to suggestions - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Jetspeed 1.6-Fusion HELP!!!!
Scott T Weaver wrote: I'm curious, which deployment refactoring has broken Fusion? Is it the things in Ate's branch or what is currently working in HEAD? Both, although the CVS head break is pretty minimal (api signature changes), whereas the branch is missing entire dependent interfaces and extended classes. -- David Sean Taylor Bluesunrise Software [EMAIL PROTECTED] [office] +01 707 773-4646 [mobile] +01 707 529 9194 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Jetspeed 1.6-Fusion HELP!!!!
Ate Douma wrote: I know and you know that I started in the new deployment branch from a clean sheet. I explicitly stated that this would *initially* result in some features gone missing. I also said these features have to be recreated once we decide this proposed new deployment model. Right now, I have had no formal acknowledgment from *anyone* yet to go ahead and commit my changes to the main branch. Here is my acknowledgement: resolve the Fusion issues before merging. Probably everybody does know though I definitely would like to see this happen, but I will be the first to acknowledge that it isn't ready for that yet. Me too And then of course the integration with the ServerManager. This will be quite easy to bring back online. Actually, I've already done so. I have the TomcatManager working again. Furthermore, I created a new (secured) ManagerServlet through which you can interact with the ApplicationManagerServer as well as the PortletApplicationManager. I've used the Tomcat ManagerServlet as example for this. Right now I can list, start, stop, unregister and undeploy a PortletApplication all from the commandline or webbrowser and working without problems. Providing the same features to Fusion will be a peace of cake. Great I'm still working on an deploy command (uploading a deployment object like a war or decorator). The basic code is already in place, the only thing left to implement is the uploading part in the new commandline tool (JetspeedConsole). I'm putting in a lot of effort to get this all working even *better* than it did before, and I'm going to provide as much effort as needed to get Fusion working again with the new deployment model, once we decided it will be the used for J2. Perhaps we should formally call a vote on the jetspeed-dev list: 1. deprecate fusion Nonsense I'll take that as a -1 on deprecating Fusion ;) -or-- 2. require developers to test fusion I do care about Fusion and, as far you *can* require that, I have no objection to make it a policy. We should think about an easier way to test fusion do though because getting J1 and J2 to build right beside each other is quite a hassle... Frankly the whole situation has led to me becoming less and less involved in Jetspeed as my contributions are devaluated. I think you are over reacting. I value your contributions very highly and I know I'm not alone ;-) You did a hell of a job (and I know it was a hell of a job) to integrate J2 with J1, AKA Fusion. I think it is one of the most important contributions to Jetspeed (as a whole, J1 and J2 together) because it not only provides a JSR-168 container but also a view of the power of J2 and a migration path for J1 users not (yet) ready to make the jump to J2. Well, we did everything except put out a release, and its long overdue. We need to figure out if we want to release 1.6 with: 2.0 M1 2.0 M2 2.0 Final Release We could do a 1.6.1 release with M2, 1.6.2 with the Final Release -- David Sean Taylor Bluesunrise Software [EMAIL PROTECTED] [office] +01 707 773-4646 [mobile] +01 707 529 9194 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Jetspeed 1.6-Fusion HELP!!!!
If anyone's asking :) , would be great to have. 1.6.1 release with M2, 1.6.2 with the Final Release Hema On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 13:35:12 -0800, David Sean Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We need to figure out if we want to release 1.6 with: 2.0 M1 2.0 M2 2.0 Final Release We could do a 1.6.1 release with M2, 1.6.2 with the Final Release -- David Sean Taylor Bluesunrise Software [EMAIL PROTECTED] [office] +01 707 773-4646 [mobile] +01 707 529 9194 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- ~~ Hema Menon - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Jetspeed 1.6-Fusion HELP!!!!
Same here...:-). My vote +1. Regards, Archana -Original Message- From: Hema Menon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2005 3:42 PM To: Jetspeed Users List Subject: Re: Jetspeed 1.6-Fusion HELP If anyone's asking :) , would be great to have. 1.6.1 release with M2, 1.6.2 with the Final Release Hema On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 13:35:12 -0800, David Sean Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We need to figure out if we want to release 1.6 with: 2.0 M1 2.0 M2 2.0 Final Release We could do a 1.6.1 release with M2, 1.6.2 with the Final Release -- David Sean Taylor Bluesunrise Software [EMAIL PROTECTED] [office] +01 707 773-4646 [mobile] +01 707 529 9194 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- ~~ Hema Menon - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Jetspeed 1.6-Fusion HELP!!!!
I second Hema on this one. It would be great to have 1.6.1 release with M2, 1.6.2 with the Final Release -- Jeff On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 15:42:28 -0600, Hema Menon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If anyone's asking :) , would be great to have. 1.6.1 release with M2, 1.6.2 with the Final Release Hema On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 13:35:12 -0800, David Sean Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We need to figure out if we want to release 1.6 with: 2.0 M1 2.0 M2 2.0 Final Release We could do a 1.6.1 release with M2, 1.6.2 with the Final Release -- David Sean Taylor Bluesunrise Software [EMAIL PROTECTED] [office] +01 707 773-4646 [mobile] +01 707 529 9194 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- ~~ Hema Menon - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Jetspeed 1.6 release
Archana Turaga wrote: Hi, When is Jetspeed 1.6 scheduled to be released? It was said that it will be out end of last yearjust wanted to know the status on that. We have downloaded the latest Jetspeed 1.6 source from cvs and built it and need it more than anything for the struts portlet functionality that it offers along with fusion. We would be comfortable if it is slated as released...it also becomes more easy for our deployment. I would really appreciate the response. Hopefully later this month. I tried to create a release in December, allocated one day. But that whole day was spent resyncing Fusion with M1 of Jetspeed-2. Fusion didn't even compile! Right now Im swamped. Hope to get a break later in the month, probably on a weekend... Sorry. Really wish the 1.6 release didn't bottleneck on me - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Jetspeed 1.6 release
David, Thanks for the reply ...I know you guys are always swamped. Regards, Archana -Original Message- From: David Sean Taylor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2005 2:29 PM To: Jetspeed Users List Subject: Re: Jetspeed 1.6 release Archana Turaga wrote: Hi, When is Jetspeed 1.6 scheduled to be released? It was said that it will be out end of last yearjust wanted to know the status on that. We have downloaded the latest Jetspeed 1.6 source from cvs and built it and need it more than anything for the struts portlet functionality that it offers along with fusion. We would be comfortable if it is slated as released...it also becomes more easy for our deployment. I would really appreciate the response. Hopefully later this month. I tried to create a release in December, allocated one day. But that whole day was spent resyncing Fusion with M1 of Jetspeed-2. Fusion didn't even compile! Right now Im swamped. Hope to get a break later in the month, probably on a weekend... Sorry. Really wish the 1.6 release didn't bottleneck on me - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Jetspeed 1.6 and Plugin
Yes, I mistake one step; maven plugin:install - Original Message - From: Henry Isidro [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: ham; Jetspeed Users List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2004 8:48 AM Subject: Re: Jetspeed 1.6 and Plugin try the tutorials...http://portals.apache.org/jetspeed-1/tutorial/ On Wed, 20 Oct 2004 17:19:00 +0200, Daniel Pardo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: After read the documentation about plugin and search in the mail list, i cant begin a new portal with the plugin. I think that is necessary a document more detailed! I did: mkdir MyPortal cd MyPortal maven jetpeed:genapp (previously I copy project.properties and project.xml in MyPortal directory and I configure this two files.) After execute maven jetspeed:deploy in the tomcat I see $jnavigation.setTemplate($config.getString(topnav.vm)) and in the other side There has been an Error! Reason: org.apache.turbine.services.InstantiationException: Failed to instantiate service Registry Get/Post Data: template = ShowError.vm Stacktrace: java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError: javax/jms/MessageListener So, somebody could tell me the first steps for start working with jetspeed??? Thanks a lot, Daniel Pardo - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Henry Isidro [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Jetspeed 1.6 and Plugin
try the tutorials...http://portals.apache.org/jetspeed-1/tutorial/ On Wed, 20 Oct 2004 17:19:00 +0200, Daniel Pardo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: After read the documentation about plugin and search in the mail list, i cant begin a new portal with the plugin. I think that is necessary a document more detailed! I did: mkdir MyPortal cd MyPortal maven jetpeed:genapp (previously I copy project.properties and project.xml in MyPortal directory and I configure this two files.) After execute maven jetspeed:deploy in the tomcat I see $jnavigation.setTemplate($config.getString(topnav.vm)) and in the other side There has been an Error! Reason: org.apache.turbine.services.InstantiationException: Failed to instantiate service Registry Get/Post Data: template = ShowError.vm Stacktrace: java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError: javax/jms/MessageListener So, somebody could tell me the first steps for start working with jetspeed??? Thanks a lot, Daniel Pardo - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Henry Isidro [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[Fwd: RE: Jetspeed 1.6-dev from CVS - Freeze in CastorRegistryService]
The fix didn't work for me. Tomcat do not go into an infinite loop anymore, but Jetspeed can't show crash at the welcome page. So, i'm still stuck... I would REALLY like to be able to use Velocity or JSP with my portlets... ;-) Would there exist any fix or workaround ? Thanks for your patience... Le ven 21/05/2004 à 19:20, Jeremy Ford a écrit : The patch has not been applied to head. The reason that the patch has not been applied is that it has not been reviewed yet. Also, it's a major change (from what I remember) to the Registry service. If possible, I wouldn't mind feedback from users who have applied the patch to their system to see what kind of results they have had. Jeremy Ford [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Jean-François Ménard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, May 21, 2004 5:16 PM To: Jetspeed Users List Subject: Jetspeed 1.6-dev from CVS - Freeze in CastorRegistryService With a fresh build from CVS, everything work fine for a while. But as soon as I try to use a VelocityPortlet or a JspPortlet, Jetspeed hang and cannot start anymore. In fact, as soon as I insert one of these portlets in my psml files, I can't start Jetspeed anymore... What's very bizarre is that HelloJSP from Jetspeed work fine!!! In jetspeedservices.log, I have: 2004-05-21 18:04:25,270 [DaemonThread:feeddaemon] DEBUG CastorRegistryService - RegistryService: Waiting for init of Registry... 2004-05-21 18:04:25,772 [DaemonThread:feeddaemon] DEBUG CastorRegistryService - RegistryService: Waiting for init of Registry... 2004-05-21 18:04:26,274 [DaemonThread:feeddaemon] DEBUG CastorRegistryService - RegistryService: Waiting for init of Registry... 2004-05-21 18:04:26,775 [DaemonThread:feeddaemon] DEBUG CastorRegistryService - RegistryService: Waiting for init of Registry... 2004-05-21 18:04:27,277 [DaemonThread:feeddaemon] DEBUG CastorRegistryService - RegistryService: Waiting for init of Registry... 2004-05-21 18:04:27,779 [DaemonThread:feeddaemon] DEBUG CastorRegistryService - RegistryService: Waiting for init of Registry... .. .. I found a thread in mailing list archives wich point to a patch posted in Jira. Question: - If the patch is the fix, wasn't it merged in HEAD? - If yes, then my issue is something else. - If not, why not? Are there any issues with this fix? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Jean-François Ménard Logyka technologies inc. ---BeginMessage--- I just realized that I emailed you directly... Sorry! Just responded to the mail... By the way, keep up the good work! Le ven 21/05/2004 à 19:20, Jeremy Ford a écrit : The patch has not been applied to head. The reason that the patch has not been applied is that it has not been reviewed yet. Also, it's a major change (from what I remember) to the Registry service. If possible, I wouldn't mind feedback from users who have applied the patch to their system to see what kind of results they have had. Jeremy Ford [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Jean-François Ménard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, May 21, 2004 5:16 PM To: Jetspeed Users List Subject: Jetspeed 1.6-dev from CVS - Freeze in CastorRegistryService With a fresh build from CVS, everything work fine for a while. But as soon as I try to use a VelocityPortlet or a JspPortlet, Jetspeed hang and cannot start anymore. In fact, as soon as I insert one of these portlets in my psml files, I can't start Jetspeed anymore... What's very bizarre is that HelloJSP from Jetspeed work fine!!! In jetspeedservices.log, I have: 2004-05-21 18:04:25,270 [DaemonThread:feeddaemon] DEBUG CastorRegistryService - RegistryService: Waiting for init of Registry... 2004-05-21 18:04:25,772 [DaemonThread:feeddaemon] DEBUG CastorRegistryService - RegistryService: Waiting for init of Registry... 2004-05-21 18:04:26,274 [DaemonThread:feeddaemon] DEBUG CastorRegistryService - RegistryService: Waiting for init of Registry... 2004-05-21 18:04:26,775 [DaemonThread:feeddaemon] DEBUG CastorRegistryService - RegistryService: Waiting for init of Registry... 2004-05-21 18:04:27,277 [DaemonThread:feeddaemon] DEBUG CastorRegistryService - RegistryService: Waiting for init of Registry... 2004-05-21 18:04:27,779 [DaemonThread:feeddaemon] DEBUG CastorRegistryService - RegistryService: Waiting for init of Registry... .. .. I found a thread in mailing list archives wich point to a patch posted in Jira. Question: - If the patch is the fix, wasn't it merged in HEAD? - If yes, then my issue is something else. - If not, why not?
