Based on the number of problems people have encountered trying to use the 1.5 JRE I'd say this is a very prudent suggestion. I personally like the second approach best because IIUC it doesn't affect the schema. It might also be neat for Geronimo to have a stock GBean that compares the properties it gets passed against the runtime env and provides a clear error message and/or fails to start if they don't match. Applications/components with specific runtime reqs could optionally reference it in their plans. Just a thought...
Best wishes, Paul On 3/1/06, John Sisson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It sounds like we could run into this issue in the future where a > configuration (possibly provided by a third party) has a minimum JDK > requirement. > > Would it make sense to have the minimum JDK requirements in the plan XML > so we can gracefully skip loading configurations when the hosting VM > does not meet the requirements? > > Another approach could be to specify configuration activation criteria > (e.g. like Maven 2's activation element in the pom) so one could provide > an assembly with some configurations for specific JDK levels or possibly > for specific operating systems (e.g. if you have configurations that use > JNI to provides access to particular O/S features) where the > configurations only get started if they are running in the appropriate > environment. > > Not high priority, but thought it might be worth discussing for the future.. > > John >
