Donald Woods wrote:
> Seems that we need a unique plugin repo for each release, given how we
> now build plugins based on the content in pom.xml instead of supplying a
> separate plugin file.... Maybe there are some additional
> car-maven-plugin enhancements needed, so you can define a range or that
> any sever release is supported by the plugin/car being built. Or maybe
> as David Jencks has suggested elsewhere, we need to setup the
> artifact_aliases.properties in each server release to alias prior
> releases (like 2.1 and 2.1.1) to the current release (which would be
> 2.1.2 for the next release.)
Heh ... funny you should mention this now. I came the same conclusion
yesterday as well (ie. we need a catalog per release given our current
process for creating the plugins). I've decided that we need a catalog
per release for those already out the door and we can think of getting
more creative for future releases.
Joe
>
>
> -Donald
>
>
> Joe Bohn wrote:
>>
>> I've got some questions (and possibly some issues) with the plugin
>> repository for Geronimo 2.1.1. I went out there attempting to update
>> the plugin catalog after the release of 2.1.1 (as I had done after 2.1
>> was released). However, I hit some issues and have some questions:
>>
>> 1) I learned too late that the download plugin repository list should
>> have been changed before we cut the release if we wanted the unique
>> catalog for 2.1.1 plugins to be the default (specified in
>> framework/configs/plugin/pom.xml). As it stands now, the default
>> plugin catalog for Geronimo 2.1.1 is pointing to the catalog for
>> Geronimo 2.1.
>>
>> 2) Perhaps sharing the plugin catalog is the correct thing. I'm really
>> not sure if that is best (or even possible). Can we have one catalog
>> support multiple Geronimo releases? ... I would presume we could.
>> Is that what people were assuming or is the assumption a catalog per
>> release?
>>
>> 3) Assuming we should have our own catalog for G 2.1.1 .... I created
>> one and put it under out there under
>> geronimo/site/trunk/docs/plugins/geronimo-2.1.1/. Naturally, you must
>> manually add the catalog for 2.1.1 since the default wasn't updated
>> prior to the release.
>>
>> 4) The catalog from #3 seems to work but I think I need to update some
>> of the plugins (esp. samples) so that they are supported on Geronimo
>> 2.1.1. So it appears that regardless of if we have shared or unique
>> catalogs among releases we will need to update the plugins to support
>> the newer releases if they are shared. Is that correct? (I
>> specifically attempted to install the 2.1-SNAPSHOT jsp sample which
>> failed in 2.1.1 due to missing 2.1 dependencies).
>>
>>
>> I was a bit thrown off by all of this since we didn't have to make the
>> same change for the download list when Geronimo 2.1 was released even
>> though we did update the catalog. This was because the version of the
>> catalog was already specified as 2.1 even while the server itself was
>> still 2.1-SNAPSHOT. I wonder if it is wise to have the catalog listed
>> as if released even when the dependent server (and plugins) are not.
>> BTW, this is also the current case for Geronimo 2.2 and it's catalog.
>> Thoughts?
>>
>> Joe
>>
>>
>>
>>
