portals-jetspeed-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Sean Taylor <da...@bluesunrise.com>
Subject Re: jetspeed 2 build organization suggestions
Date Mon, 23 Aug 2004 15:49:08 GMT

On Aug 22, 2004, at 12:00 PM, David Jencks wrote:

> I have been reviewing the jetspeed 2 build process and believe it 
> could be improved in several areas.
> 1. using maven features appropriately within the current project 
> structure.  For instance, it appears to me that using the multiproject 
> plugin instead of the reactor can replace about 236 lines with 2 in 
> the top level maven.xml file.
+1 we've been meaning to look into that.

> 2. restructuring the project to eliminate conditionals and clarify 
> dependencies.  Currently the build appears to be oriented entirely 
> toward deploying on tomcat, and from my brief review this appears to 
> permeate many areas of the project.  I suggest removing all such 
> dependencies from  current build files and creating a new set of 
> modules for each installation environment,
> installation/tomcat
> installation/weblogic
> installation/geronimo
> ...
> that will customize as appropriate for the target environment and 
> provide appropriate installation tools.
Sounds good to me. Might want to include JBoss in there too ;-)

> Similarly, I think it might be advisable to factor out the database 
> setup support into separate modules such as
> installation/database/hsqldb
> installation/database/oracle
> ...
We generate the scripts with Torque. So the installation is generic 
across all databases. Thus Im -1 on this one

> I have not yet discovered to what extent the persistence support is 
> pluggable, but if for instance you are using ojb via its jdo support 
> the choice of jdo vendor and appropriate setup could also be isolated 
> in separate modules.
The persistence plugin allows you to swap out OJB with another 
persistence framework such as Hibernate or Castor DB.
IMO JDO would lessen the need for a persistence plugin, since we would 
always write to the JDO APIs and then JDO would function much like the 
Unfortunately open source JDO implementations are still lagging behind 
the Hibernate and OJB non-standard implementations
Is Geronimo going to support JDO?

> I'd like to know if there are objections to this approach before I 
> spend a significant amount of time experimenting with it.
No objections to multi-project, target environments
However Im -1 on the installation/database/* proposal unless you can 
improve on the current process

> Many thanks,
> david jencks
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: jetspeed-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: jetspeed-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org

David Sean Taylor
Bluesunrise Software
[office]   +01 707 773-4646
[mobile] +01 707 529 9194

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

View raw message