[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
Re: [rt-pmc] Re: jetty7 distribution - late regrets for todays call
|
Agreed, we formalized what we can and can't do in the short term and
identified some longer range goals for where we would like to be..
good call :)
cheers,
jesse
--
jesse mcconnell
jesse.mcconnell@xxxxxxxxx
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 09:52, Jochen Krause<jkrause@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Sorry for my late regrets for todays meeting, I could not make the call.
> From the notes It seems the jetty distribution topic went well.
> Jochen
>
> Am 28.07.2009 um 23:32 schrieb Thomas Watson:
>
> We should discuss this at the RT PMC meeting tomorrow.
>
> The "works with" dependency does not apply to things like webapps (or osgi
> bundles) in general. These are just things that can be installed on top of
> your platform. You are correct, if we had to specify all these cases then it
> would make no sense. I think "works with" applies more to things that you
> optionally use if they are installed and they provide some function to your
> component. The JSP case seems like it fits in this category. But just
> because we claim the dependency as a "works with" does not imply to me that
> we have the freedom to distribute that "works with" artifact from an eclipse
> downloads server.
>
> Tom
>
>
>
> <graycol.gif>Jesse McConnell ---07/28/2009 03:26:11 PM---Then what is the
> reasoning behind the 'works with' concept? Under
>
> <ecblank.gif>
> From:<ecblank.gif>
> Jesse McConnell <jesse.mcconnell@xxxxxxxxx>
> <ecblank.gif>
> To:<ecblank.gif>
> Runtime Project PMC mailing list <rt-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> <ecblank.gif>
> Date:<ecblank.gif>
> 07/28/2009 03:26 PM
> <ecblank.gif>
> Subject:<ecblank.gif>
> Re: [rt-pmc] Re: jetty7 distribution
> ________________________________
>
>
> Then what is the reasoning behind the 'works with' concept? Under
> that line of thought jetty would have a works with relationship with
> scads and scads of other projects out there...grails, geronimo, any
> webapp that a user deploys into jetty would be a 'works with' then..
>
> so to have a war file that we toss in the distribution zip file, or
> the jsp jar files, we need to pass through eclipse IP process
> completely as if the source was to be vetted and committed to eclipse
> svn (even though it would never be)?
>
> jesse
>
> --
> jesse mcconnell
> jesse.mcconnell@xxxxxxxxx
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 15:20, Thomas Watson<tjwatson@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> I think "works with" can only be applied if the "optional" stuff you work
>> with is not actually shipped in the download artifacts you make available
>> from eclipse. So you would still have to find a place to host these other
>> bits until the IP process can be done to pull these bits into Eclipse.
>>
>> I get the impression that is not the outcome you desire for the jetty 7
>> release. I think you actually need the bits contained in one easy download
>> for your jetty users.
>>
>> Tom
>>
>>
>>
>> Jesse McConnell ---07/28/2009 02:38:04 PM---Ok, I just had a talk with
>> Barb
>> Cochrane about this situation and
>>
>>
>> From:
>> Jesse McConnell <jesse.mcconnell@xxxxxxxxx>
>> To:
>> rt-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx, "Jetty @ Eclipse developer discussion list"
>> <jetty-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Date:
>> 07/28/2009 02:38 PM
>> Subject:
>> [rt-pmc] Re: jetty7 distribution
>> ________________________________
>>
>>
>> Ok, I just had a talk with Barb Cochrane about this situation and
>> there might be another way of talking about this...so I'll back up a
>> bit and describe things another way and see if anything changes.
>>
>> https://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3432
>>
>> as Barb commented on this CQ there is the works with dependency that
>> some of these things might fall under, specifically the items we are
>> talking about here that are kind of holding up the release.
>>
>>
>> http://www.eclipse.org/org/documents/Eclipse_Policy_and_Procedure_for_3rd_Party_Dependencies_Final.pdf
>>
>> Eclipse seems to have a term for dependencies called works with which
>> means that it is basically an optional dependency that the project may
>> or may not need.
>>
>> Normal jetty startup:
>>
>>> java -jar start.jar
>>
>> To start jetty with jsp:
>>
>>> java -jar start.jar OPTIONS=default,jsp
>>
>> This would load up the jsp jars into the runtime and then jsp would be
>> supported. Does this qualify as a works with dependency that we would
>> be able to fulfill the eclipse release requirements with? If so I am
>> being told that we can avoid all of this nasty approval through normal
>> IP channels stuff and still adhere to the letter of the law as it
>> were.
>>
>> Does this 'works with' term apply here?
>>
>> also for the cometd war file, that is a sample war file that we bring
>> into the distribution for demo purposes with our test applications we
>> bundle in the distribution...remove it and jetty still runs
>> fine...would that also be a 'works with' dependency?
>>
>> jesse
>>
>> --
>> jesse mcconnell
>> jesse.mcconnell@xxxxxxxxx
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 12:14, Jesse McConnell<jesse.mcconnell@xxxxxxxxx>
>> wrote:
>>> All,
>>>
>>> I started up a thread on this earlier and it ended up taking a spin
>>> off into other things and I need to steer it back to the topic of our
>>> two jsp artifacts and the cometd war file.
>>>
>>> https://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3457 - jsp-api-2.1
>>> patched glassfish jasper api from glassfish tag
>>> SJSAS-9_1_1-B60F-07_Jan_2009
>>> https://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3458 - jsp-2.1 patched
>>> glassfish jasper api from glassfish tag SJSAS-9_1_1-B60F-07_Jan_2009
>>> https://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3459
>> - cometd demo war
>>> file used for showing cometd features of jetty-distribution
>>>
>>> Following the vein of the last thread I have started the process of
>>> getting these artifacts into CQ's. I have no idea how long this will
>>> take to make it through as we are largely dealing with source and
>>> processes that are outside of the jetty realm (being glassfish).
>>> While jasper itself has been approved multiple times by the looks of
>>> it in IPzilla, this is a different source location, different process
>>> for contribution, etc etc.
>>>
>>> I will not dispute the desire or need to have a proper official JSP
>>> bundle/artifact that eclipse gets behind in the future, but for the
>>> time being we would like to get our jetty7 release out the door from
>>> eclipse and get moving on the parallel development and deployment of
>>> jetty8 with servlet 3.0 features and get those in the hands of our
>>> users as well. It seems that these three artifacts are what are
>>> holding us up from being able to make our jetty7 distribution and link
>>> to it for users to download from eclipse.org as we have been for the
>>> RC and Milestone releases up til now.
>>>
>>> It sounds like we need an official exemption for us to ship our
>>> jetty-distribution in the short term in a form that is akin to the
>>> previous releases of jetty. We'll be more then happy to switch over
>>> to an official eclipse backed jsp implementation and api once one
>>> exists in a form we can use but for the time being we have users that
>>> we need to get an official jetty7 release out for.
>>>
>>> Is this going to be possible or do I need to start chasing down the
>>> alternative distribution scenarios for the jetty7 release?
>>>
>>> cheers,
>>> Jesse
>>>
>>> --
>>> jesse mcconnell
>>> jesse.mcconnell@xxxxxxxxx
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> rt-pmc mailing list
>> rt-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/rt-pmc
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> rt-pmc mailing list
>> rt-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/rt-pmc
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> rt-pmc mailing list
> rt-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/rt-pmc
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rt-pmc mailing list
> rt-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/rt-pmc
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rt-pmc mailing list
> rt-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/rt-pmc
>
>