Knopflerfish does NOT support exploded archives yet.

http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1703244&group_id=82798&atid=567241

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Juris Galang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 01, 2007 1:48 PM
Subject: Re: [tc-dev] Resolver and other properties


>>   Are those system properties already been removed? If so, then maven
>
> They have been removed. But the changes haven't been checked in yet.
> Not until have the substituted functionality.
>
>> - can you please elaborate what this mean: "Additional repository
>> locations should be configured by the test that needs them via code or
>> the test's config."
>> - we don't really need more then one repository for resolving modules
>
> Ideally we don't need more than one repository. All of our modules
> goes under one repository following the Maven convention. But if
> there's a need for it, and it's very likely a special case (and very
> few), then the test will have to add that configuration.
>
>> - single l1.configbundles.default property is not enough. Generally,
>> list of default bundles loaded by the DSO should not be changed, but
>> additional modules need to be added to that list without changing
>> tc-config.xml (i.e. when running tc:test), so it is better to have a
>> separate property like l1.configbundles.additional that would list
>> additional modules without overwriting l1.configbundles.default
>>
>> - slightly related: the format of l1.configbundles.default need to be
>> unified and it should allow to specify groupId, artifactId as well as
>> the version ranges. Perhaps we could simple use the same format as the
>> one used in Required-Bundles
>
> Both sounds good.
>
>> - we may need to prioritize Terracotta usage in embedded mode over
>> kit-based install.
>
> Can you elaborate?
>
>> - another important scenario to take into the account is the
>> ability to
>> run Terracotta with config module that is not packaged as a jar, when
>> module is being developer and runned from within IDE. That will
>> make it
>> much easier to debug config modules, especially those that have
>> some code.
>
> This also sounds good. I will have to check if KF could handle
> exploded jars. But first things first - let's implement/decide on our
> proposed solution.
>
>
>
> On Oct 1, 2007, at 1:16 PM, Eugene Kuleshov wrote:
>
>>
>>   Are those system properties already been removed? If so, then maven
>> plugin will be broken until there will be some substitution for that
>> functionality.
>>
>>   While it is a good idea to clean those system properties, I believe
>> that it is more critical to fix module versioning issues described in
>> CDV-435.
>>
>>   Here are few random observations:
>>
>> - can you please elaborate what this mean: "Additional repository
>> locations should be configured by the test that needs them via code or
>> the test's config."
>> - we don't really need more then one repository for resolving modules
>>
>> - single l1.configbundles.default property is not enough. Generally,
>> list of default bundles loaded by the DSO should not be changed, but
>> additional modules need to be added to that list without changing
>> tc-config.xml (i.e. when running tc:test), so it is better to have a
>> separate property like l1.configbundles.additional that would list
>> additional modules without overwriting l1.configbundles.default
>>
>> - slightly related: the format of l1.configbundles.default need to be
>> unified and it should allow to specify groupId, artifactId as well as
>> the version ranges. Perhaps we could simple use the same format as the
>> one used in Required-Bundles
>>
>> - we may need to prioritize Terracotta usage in embedded mode over
>> kit-based install.
>>
>> - another important scenario to take into the account is the
>> ability to
>> run Terracotta with config module that is not packaged as a jar, when
>> module is being developer and runned from within IDE. That will
>> make it
>> much easier to debug config modules, especially those that have
>> some code.
>>
>>   regards,
>>   Eugene
>>
>>
>> Juris Galang wrote:
>>> Gary and I have been working last Friday on cleaning up the Resolver
>>> class and our use of various System properties when using the config
>>> modules under test and live environment.
>>>
>>> What it boils down to is that we made the Resolver (and related
>>> classes) be ignorant that there is a test scenario at all.
>>>
>>> This means that references to System properties like
>>> tc.tests.configuration.modules and tc.tests.configuration.modules.url
>>> are no longer used.
>>>
>>> By default config-modules are expected to be found in the default
>>> modules repository, ie: the base directory + "/modules" --- In our
>>> kit, the base directory would be wherever Terracotta was installed
>>> ($TC_INSTALL_DIR), and during tests this is the 'build/' directory.
>>>
>>> Additional repository locations should be configured by the test that
>>> needs them via code or the test's config.
>>>
>>> With our Maven plugins there is no kit, and that it could execute in
>>> either the live or test scenario (as in the case of the Geronimo
>>> plugin) - so the $TC_INSTALL_DIR property may or may not exist and
>>> the Resolver can't correctly assume the location of the modules
>>> repository.
>>>
>>> Here's what we propose:
>>> We add a new TC property called l1.configbundles.repos (the name
>>> could change) - this is a comma-separated list of additional
>>> repository locations that will be tacked on the list of repositories
>>> used when locating config modules.
>>>
>>> This is no different than the l1.configbundles.default property - a
>>> list of config modules which gets loaded no matter what the current
>>> scenario is - so it should work across the board and for our Maven
>>> plugins scenario.
>>>
>>> Thoughts?
>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> tc-dev mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://lists.terracotta.org/mailman/listinfo/tc-dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> tc-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.terracotta.org/mailman/listinfo/tc-dev
> 

_______________________________________________
tc-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.terracotta.org/mailman/listinfo/tc-dev

Reply via email to