portals-jetspeed-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Jencks <david_jen...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: Reorganizing Jetspeed repository
Date Sun, 08 Jan 2006 18:33:07 GMT
After working on the geronimo integration for a bit I have an opinion  
on what the most important reorganization step is :-)

The current jetspeed.war is basically a tomcat-specific artifact.  In  
order to work in geronimo, I had to build a jetspeed war without any  
classes or lib entries. I think the current war should be built in a  
module inside app-servers rather than as the top level artifact.  I  
also think there needs to be either separate builds for including  
different amounts of lib jars or a way of customizing the build to  
include different jars.  (In M2 I think profiles give you some  
control like this).

I'm also not exactly sure what the meaning of most of the stuff in  
jetspeed.war is.  My uneducated impression is that there are at least  
one skin and a site layout. Assuming this bears some relationship to  
the actual contents, I think that having these as separate modules  
that are unpacked into the jetspeed war would make it much easier for  
someone to either construct additional skins or assemble a portal  
with exactly the parts they want to use.

I'd be happy to work on a patch for customizing the contents of  
jetspeed.war, but I don't think moving the war build into  app- 
servers is appropriate for a patch since mostly it would be an svn mv  
command.

thanks
david jencks

On Jan 8, 2006, at 6:51 AM, David Le Strat wrote:

> David,
>
> What about a common-components section?  There ought
> to be common-components between all the projects.  For
> instance:
>
> - Component Manager
> - Deploy Tools
> - Rdbms
> - Security (maybe)
> - Prefs (maybe)
>
> Thoughts?  Also, can we help out.
>
> Let me know.
>
> Regards,
>
> David Le Strat
>
> --- David Sean Taylor <david@bluesunrise.com> wrote:
>
>> Ate Douma wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't want to restart the discussion we had
>> about this subject last
>>>>> month on
>>>>> the general@ list, but I'd like to see a more
>> architectural discussion
>>>>> first which
>>>>> components are to be considered not j2-specific
>> or portals generic
>>>>> before we
>>>>> start moving things around.
>>>>>
>>>>
>> Why don't we move ALL components out to the jetspeed
>> components project?
>> Yes, this does mean everything.... but if that makes
>> it easier to build
>> the system, and to reuse the components to build
>> different
>> configurations of jetspeed, then isnt that a good
>> thing?
>>
>> Im going to give this a try...
>>
>> /portals
>> 	/jetspeed-components
>> 	/jetspeed-api
>> 	/applications		
>> 	/bridges
>> 	/docs
>> 	/installers
>> 	/configuration
>> 		/j2ee-geronimo
>> 		/j2ee-tomcat
>> 		/j2ee-jetty
>> 		/j2ee-jboss
>> 		/j2me-geronimo
>> 		/j2me-tomcat
>> 		/j2me-jetty
>> 		....
>> 		
>>
>> Here are the top level directories currently in J2:
>>
>> app-servers	- move to configurations
>> applications	- move to applications
>> archives	- do we need this?
>> commons		- move to jetspeed-components/commons
>> components	- move to components
>> content-server  - drop
>> design-docs	- move to docs
>> docs            - move to docs
>> etc		- move to configuration
>> graphic_design  - move to docs
>> installer	- move to installers
>> installer2	- move to installers
>> jetspeed-api	- move to jetspeed-api
>> layout-portlets -
>> maven-plugin	- move to configuration
>> patched-jars	- ?
>> portlet-api	- drop
>> src		- move to configurations
>> taglibs		- move to applications
>> xdocs		- move to docs
>>
>> Basically we are breaking Jetspeed apart.
>> There will be nothing left but configurations!
>> We are victims of our own component architecture :)
>> Thats why Im leaving the jetspeed name on both the
>> api and components.
>> We could also call these portals-api or
>> portals-components or just plain
>> components or api...but I think anything other than
>> the jetspeed name
>> seems a bit destructive. I mean do we want to kill
>> the jetspeed name
>> just after our final release? :)
>> Or is jetspeed now nothing more than just another
>> configuration of
>> "components". I think the jetspeed team is in a
>> funny situation. We want
>> others to use our api and components, but we don't
>> want to give up the
>> ownership.
>>
>> I also think we need to make a pass over the
>> components
>> All of the components found under components/portals
>> should be moved to
>> top level components
>>
>> Are any of the components "jetspeed" specific?
>> You could argue that the engine or the pipeline is
>>
>> As for the build, we need to switch over to Maven-2
>> This refactoring and build conversion seems like a
>> lot of work
>> Using a branch to do so might be the best solution
>> Its either that or we all stop developing against
>> the trunk for a few
>> days and work together to migrate
>>
>>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>> jetspeed-dev-unsubscribe@portals.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail:
>> jetspeed-dev-help@portals.apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
> ________________________
> David Le Strat
> Blogging @ http://dlsthoughts.blogspot.com
>
>
> 		
> __________________________________________
> Yahoo! DSL – Something to write home about.
> Just $16.99/mo. or less.
> dsl.yahoo.com
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: jetspeed-dev-unsubscribe@portals.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: jetspeed-dev-help@portals.apache.org
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: jetspeed-dev-unsubscribe@portals.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: jetspeed-dev-help@portals.apache.org


Mime
View raw message