ace-commits mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Bram de Kruijff (JIRA)" <>
Subject [jira] [Created] (ACE-347) Redesign Management Agent
Date Tue, 07 May 2013 08:07:15 GMT
Bram de Kruijff created ACE-347:

             Summary: Redesign Management Agent
                 Key: ACE-347
             Project: ACE
          Issue Type: Bug
            Reporter: Bram de Kruijff
            Assignee: Bram de Kruijff

The Managent Agent was made "self-contained" in ACE-232 but there are still some concerns
with regard to complexity and functionality. This issue deals with restructuring the Managent
Agent code to make it easier to maintain, configure and extend. Also see ACE-324 / ACE-324.

Management Agent code:   

The MA implementation is setup very modular and it assembled mainly based on CM factories.
Maybe a little too much. The code is scattered over projects making it hard to maintain and
it is violating visibility rules to implementation classes which is nasty in bndtools.

-> We should centralize the 'dedicated' MA code in the MA project allowing us to clean
up a lot of projects.

Management Agent config:   

The fact that we can theoretically reconfigure these services at runtime through CM does not
add much more then a runtime dependency on a CM impl. There is an obvisou catch-22 in boostrapping
and no mechanism to provision these configurations to a private CM and in fact all configuration
is done in code and it is very complex. 

-> we should centralize configuration in a well documented format with a simple default
case and possible extension.

Management Agent extension:   

Bringing in extensions or customization on the bundle classpath is very hard on only partially
possible. There is a mechanism to disabled activators and one to add custom ones. Theoretically
one could also provide services from "user space", but there is no way do do so in a simple
way as there are no visible APIs and the CM catch-22.

-> We should simplify extension on bundle classpath through a simple factory SPI. Bringing
these on the classpath can be done through wrapping (as launcher does) or maybe also fragment

-> User space extensions could have a real use case in management/monitoring. However,
this means we need to expose some API. Question is whether we want to expose prg.apache.ace.*
(or some subset) so that consumers can talk to for exmaple Log directly or that we should
facade this behind a single ManagementAgent API to keep it more contained.

Multiple agents:   

There is code to configure and handle multiple agents. Not sure if it really works as it is
a very exotic and possibly undesirable use-case. There are many conditionals for this through
the CM code.

-> At least make it simpler and discuss wither we actually want/need this at all.

Resource Processors:

RPs need to resolve, typically requiring framework, deploymentadmin (spi) and eventadmin,
but maybe more. In the current situation the MA exports these package with an additional required
attribute (managementagent=true). As a result standard 3rd party RPs will not resolve. Therefore
the MA should be as self-contained as possible but still export these packages without the
attribute and (re)import them with the appropriate range.


This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see:

View raw message