7:03 a.m.
When using current WildFly build from sources I see this message after
startup is complete:
24.07. 21:12:26,131 INFO [org.jboss.as#done] WFLYSRV0025: WildFly
1.0.0.Alpha3 "Kenny" started in 28469ms - Started 374 of 500 services
(179 services are lazy, passive or on-demand)
Two things I suppose to be changed:
1. version is now the version of the underlying core, but version of the
server should also be shown, or not? May be something like "WildFly
9.0.0-Alpha-SNAPSHOT based on WildFly Core 1.0.0.Alpha3" ?
2. the nickname "Kenny" already was used for WildFly 8.x. Time to create
a new one for 9.0.x, or?
7:15 a.m.
On 7/24/14, 5:03 PM, Frank Langelage wrote:
When using current WildFly build from sources I see this message
after
startup is complete:
24.07. 21:12:26,131 INFO [org.jboss.as#done] WFLYSRV0025: WildFly
1.0.0.Alpha3 "Kenny" started in 28469ms - Started 374 of 500 services
(179 services are lazy, passive or on-demand)
Two things I suppose to be changed:
1. version is now the version of the underlying core, but version of the
server should also be shown, or not? May be something like "WildFly
9.0.0-Alpha-SNAPSHOT based on WildFly Core 1.0.0.Alpha3" ?
IMHO it should just be the version of the full dist, with the core
version only shown if whatever mechanism we add for letting a dist-based
on core control this isn't implemented by a particular dist.
Right now I assume we have no mechanism to let dists based on the core
control this.
2. the nickname "Kenny" already was used for WildFly 8.x.
Time to create
a new one for 9.0.x, or?
Please, let's drop code names!!! It's just another thing to screw up.
_______________________________________________
wildfly-dev mailing list
wildfly-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/wildfly-dev
--
Brian Stansberry
Senior Principal Software Engineer
JBoss by Red Hat
7:43 a.m.
I'm not following very close the development of WF9, but I have a simple
question, the log shows now WFLYSRV0025 instead of JBAS015874 ?
Jorge Solórzano
On Thu, Jul 24, 2014 at 4:15 PM, Brian Stansberry <
brian.stansberry(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On 7/24/14, 5:03 PM, Frank Langelage wrote:
> When using current WildFly build from sources I see this message after
> startup is complete:
> 24.07. 21:12:26,131 INFO [org.jboss.as#done]
WFLYSRV0025: WildFly
> 1.0.0.Alpha3 "Kenny" started in 28469ms - Started 374 of 500 services
> (179 services are lazy, passive or on-demand)
>
> Two things I suppose to be changed:
> 1. version is now the version of the underlying core, but version of the
> server should also be shown, or not? May be something like "WildFly
> 9.0.0-Alpha-SNAPSHOT based on WildFly Core 1.0.0.Alpha3" ?
IMHO it should just be the version of the full dist, with the core
version only shown if whatever mechanism we add for letting a dist-based
on core control this isn't implemented by a particular dist.
Right now I assume we have no mechanism to let dists based on the core
control this.
> 2. the nickname "Kenny" already was used for WildFly 8.x. Time to create
> a new one for 9.0.x, or?
Please, let's drop code names!!! It's just another thing to screw up.
>
> _______________________________________________
> wildfly-dev mailing list
> wildfly-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/wildfly-dev
>
--
Brian Stansberry
Senior Principal Software Engineer
JBoss by Red Hat
_______________________________________________
wildfly-dev mailing list
wildfly-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/wildfly-dev
10:03 a.m.
Yes, see https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WFLY-2864 and
http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/wildfly-dev/2014-February/001727.html
On 7/24/14, 5:43 PM, Jorge Solórzano wrote:
I'm not following very close the development of WF9, but I have a
simple
question, the log shows now WFLYSRV0025 instead of JBAS015874 ?
Jorge Solórzano
On Thu, Jul 24, 2014 at 4:15 PM, Brian Stansberry
<brian.stansberry(a)redhat.com <mailto:brian.stansberry@redhat.com>> wrote:
On 7/24/14, 5:03 PM, Frank Langelage wrote:
> When using current WildFly build from sources I see this message
after
> startup is complete:
> 24.07. 21:12:26,131 INFO [org.jboss.as#done
<http://org.jboss.as#done>]
WFLYSRV0025: WildFly
> 1.0.0.Alpha3 "Kenny" started in 28469ms - Started 374 of 500
services
> (179 services are lazy, passive or on-demand)
>
> Two things I suppose to be changed:
> 1. version is now the version of the underlying core, but version
of the
> server should also be shown, or not? May be something like "WildFly
> 9.0.0-Alpha-SNAPSHOT based on WildFly Core 1.0.0.Alpha3" ?
IMHO it should just be the version of the full dist, with the core
version only shown if whatever mechanism we add for letting a dist-based
on core control this isn't implemented by a particular dist.
Right now I assume we have no mechanism to let dists based on the core
control this.
> 2. the nickname "Kenny" already was used for WildFly 8.x. Time to
create
> a new one for 9.0.x, or?
Please, let's drop code names!!! It's just another thing to screw up.
>
> _______________________________________________
> wildfly-dev mailing list
> wildfly-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:wildfly-dev@lists.jboss.org>
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/wildfly-dev
>
--
Brian Stansberry
Senior Principal Software Engineer
JBoss by Red Hat
_______________________________________________
wildfly-dev mailing list
wildfly-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:wildfly-dev@lists.jboss.org>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/wildfly-dev
--
Brian Stansberry
Senior Principal Software Engineer
JBoss by Red Hat
8:54 a.m.
On 07/24/2014 03:15 PM, Brian Stansberry wrote:
On 7/24/14, 5:03 PM, Frank Langelage wrote:
> When using current WildFly build from sources I see this message after
> startup is complete:
> 24.07. 21:12:26,131 INFO [org.jboss.as#done] WFLYSRV0025: WildFly
> 1.0.0.Alpha3 "Kenny" started in 28469ms - Started 374 of 500 services
> (179 services are lazy, passive or on-demand)
>
> Two things I suppose to be changed:
> 1. version is now the version of the underlying core, but version of the
> server should also be shown, or not? May be something like "WildFly
> 9.0.0-Alpha-SNAPSHOT based on WildFly Core 1.0.0.Alpha3" ?
IMHO it should just be the version of the full dist, with the core
version only shown if whatever mechanism we add for letting a dist-based
on core control this isn't implemented by a particular dist.
Probably not
ideal, but something like this almost kind of works
https://github.com/jamezp/wildfly/compare/name-test. We could clean the
Version API up though and probably do it a little different.
Right now I assume we have no mechanism to let dists based on the core
control this.
> 2. the nickname "Kenny" already was used for WildFly 8.x. Time to create
> a new one for 9.0.x, or?
Please, let's drop code names!!! It's just another thing to screw up.
+1
> _______________________________________________
> wildfly-dev mailing list
> wildfly-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/wildfly-dev
>
--
James R. Perkins
JBoss by Red Hat
10:24 a.m.
On 7/24/14, 6:54 PM, James R. Perkins wrote:
On 07/24/2014 03:15 PM, Brian Stansberry wrote:
> On 7/24/14, 5:03 PM, Frank Langelage wrote:
>> When using current WildFly build from sources I see this message after
>> startup is complete:
>> 24.07. 21:12:26,131 INFO [org.jboss.as#done] WFLYSRV0025: WildFly
>> 1.0.0.Alpha3 "Kenny" started in 28469ms - Started 374 of 500 services
>> (179 services are lazy, passive or on-demand)
>>
>> Two things I suppose to be changed:
>> 1. version is now the version of the underlying core, but version of the
>> server should also be shown, or not? May be something like "WildFly
>> 9.0.0-Alpha-SNAPSHOT based on WildFly Core 1.0.0.Alpha3" ?
> IMHO it should just be the version of the full dist, with the core
> version only shown if whatever mechanism we add for letting a dist-based
> on core control this isn't implemented by a particular dist.
Probably not ideal, but something like this almost kind of works
https://github.com/jamezp/wildfly/compare/name-test.
Yeah, IIRC (which is chancy) in an IRC chat a few weeks back something
like that looked like the likely solution. Some things to think about:
1) This is the EAP mechanism, so we'll need to think about how it will
relate to EAP once that becomes relevant (i.e. don't steal its thing and
then get stuck when it wants it back.) I think that's mostly just
thinking about the log message we'll want to write adn ensuring
ProductConfig can support that with the needed data.
2) product.conf as a file name kind of sucks for something that isn't a
product
3) How this relates to the process of building a server when each of the
pieces that make up that server (e.g. web-build) try to write that file,
unless it's just trivial to have the final build win.
We could clean the
Version API up though and probably do it a little different.
>
> Right now I assume we have no mechanism to let dists based on the core
> control this.
>
>> 2. the nickname "Kenny" already was used for WildFly 8.x. Time to
create
>> a new one for 9.0.x, or?
> Please, let's drop code names!!! It's just another thing to screw up.
+1
>
>> _______________________________________________
>> wildfly-dev mailing list
>> wildfly-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/wildfly-dev
>>
>
--
Brian Stansberry
Senior Principal Software Engineer
JBoss by Red Hat
2:09 a.m.
On 07/24/2014 06:24 PM, Brian Stansberry wrote:
On 7/24/14, 6:54 PM, James R. Perkins wrote:
>
> On 07/24/2014 03:15 PM, Brian Stansberry wrote:
>> On 7/24/14, 5:03 PM, Frank Langelage wrote:
>>> When using current WildFly build from sources I see this message after
>>> startup is complete:
>>> 24.07. 21:12:26,131 INFO [org.jboss.as#done] WFLYSRV0025: WildFly
>>> 1.0.0.Alpha3 "Kenny" started in 28469ms - Started 374 of 500
services
>>> (179 services are lazy, passive or on-demand)
>>>
>>> Two things I suppose to be changed:
>>> 1. version is now the version of the underlying core, but version
>>> of the
>>> server should also be shown, or not? May be something like "WildFly
>>> 9.0.0-Alpha-SNAPSHOT based on WildFly Core 1.0.0.Alpha3" ?
>> IMHO it should just be the version of the full dist, with the core
>> version only shown if whatever mechanism we add for letting a
>> dist-based
>> on core control this isn't implemented by a particular dist.
> Probably not ideal, but something like this almost kind of works
> https://github.com/jamezp/wildfly/compare/name-test.
Yeah, IIRC (which is chancy) in an IRC chat a few weeks back something
like that looked like the likely solution. Some things to think about:
1) This is the EAP mechanism, so we'll need to think about how it will
relate to EAP once that becomes relevant (i.e. don't steal its thing
and then get stuck when it wants it back.) I think that's mostly just
thinking about the log message we'll want to write adn ensuring
ProductConfig can support that with the needed data.
Agreed.
2) product.conf as a file name kind of sucks for something that isn't
a product
Again agreed.
3) How this relates to the process of building a server when each of
the pieces that make up that server (e.g. web-build) try to write that
file, unless it's just trivial to have the final build win.
Maybe it's
something we can enhance the build plugin to do now. Seems
there should be a reasonable solution. Maybe a simple properties file
lookup or something like that. Anyway I don't want to jump in the middle
if someone is already looking at it.
> We could clean the
> Version API up though and probably do it a little different.
>>
>> Right now I assume we have no mechanism to let dists based on the core
>> control this.
>>
>>> 2. the nickname "Kenny" already was used for WildFly 8.x. Time to
>>> create
>>> a new one for 9.0.x, or?
>> Please, let's drop code names!!! It's just another thing to screw up.
> +1
>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> wildfly-dev mailing list
>>> wildfly-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/wildfly-dev
>>>
>>
>
--
James R. Perkins
JBoss by Red Hat
2:23 a.m.
On 7/25/14, 12:09 PM, James R. Perkins wrote:
On 07/24/2014 06:24 PM, Brian Stansberry wrote:
> On 7/24/14, 6:54 PM, James R. Perkins wrote:
>>
>> On 07/24/2014 03:15 PM, Brian Stansberry wrote:
>>> On 7/24/14, 5:03 PM, Frank Langelage wrote:
>>>> When using current WildFly build from sources I see this message after
>>>> startup is complete:
>>>> 24.07. 21:12:26,131 INFO [org.jboss.as#done] WFLYSRV0025: WildFly
>>>> 1.0.0.Alpha3 "Kenny" started in 28469ms - Started 374 of 500
services
>>>> (179 services are lazy, passive or on-demand)
>>>>
>>>> Two things I suppose to be changed:
>>>> 1. version is now the version of the underlying core, but version
>>>> of the
>>>> server should also be shown, or not? May be something like "WildFly
>>>> 9.0.0-Alpha-SNAPSHOT based on WildFly Core 1.0.0.Alpha3" ?
>>> IMHO it should just be the version of the full dist, with the core
>>> version only shown if whatever mechanism we add for letting a
>>> dist-based
>>> on core control this isn't implemented by a particular dist.
>> Probably not ideal, but something like this almost kind of works
>> https://github.com/jamezp/wildfly/compare/name-test.
>
> Yeah, IIRC (which is chancy) in an IRC chat a few weeks back something
> like that looked like the likely solution. Some things to think about:
>
> 1) This is the EAP mechanism, so we'll need to think about how it will
> relate to EAP once that becomes relevant (i.e. don't steal its thing
> and then get stuck when it wants it back.) I think that's mostly just
> thinking about the log message we'll want to write adn ensuring
> ProductConfig can support that with the needed data.
Agreed.
>
> 2) product.conf as a file name kind of sucks for something that isn't
> a product
Again agreed.
EAP will probably want to keep it though, so perhaps ProductConfig can
check for 2 things, giving precedence to product.conf.
>
> 3) How this relates to the process of building a server when each of
> the pieces that make up that server (e.g. web-build) try to write that
> file, unless it's just trivial to have the final build win.
Maybe it's something we can enhance the build plugin to do now. Seems
there should be a reasonable solution. Maybe a simple properties file
lookup or something like that. Anyway I don't want to jump in the middle
if someone is already looking at it.
I doubt anyone is looking into this; IIRC it was just something that was
chatted about a bit. Ping Stuart if no one responds; if anyone is doing
anything it's likely him.
It's possible the provisioning stuff already handles all this just fine;
I am far from an expert on the current status.
>
>> We could clean the
>> Version API up though and probably do it a little different.
>>>
>>> Right now I assume we have no mechanism to let dists based on the core
>>> control this.
>>>
>>>> 2. the nickname "Kenny" already was used for WildFly 8.x. Time
to
>>>> create
>>>> a new one for 9.0.x, or?
>>> Please, let's drop code names!!! It's just another thing to screw
up.
>> +1
>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> wildfly-dev mailing list
>>>> wildfly-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/wildfly-dev
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
--
Brian Stansberry
Senior Principal Software Engineer
JBoss by Red Hat
3575
days inactive
3576
days old
7 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
Brian Stansberry -
Frank Langelage -
James R. Perkins -
Jorge Solórzano