cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Carsten Ziegeler" <cziege...@s-und-n.de>
Subject RE: Instrumentation, anyone?
Date Thu, 04 Mar 2004 16:32:21 GMT
Gianugo Rabellino wrote:
> 
> Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
> 
> > Yes, JMX is imho the way to go, so a general +1. I don't have much 
> > knowledge of JMX, but I would assistent and help in such an effort 
> > whereever I can.
> > 
> > The simple question is only, which version we would use as base, I 
> > would suggest 2.2.
> 
> It really depends on how far we are from 2.2. I don't want to 
> sound pessimistic, and I must confess that I'm the first one 
> lagging behind the Fortress migration, but I have an overall 
> feeling that we are still quite far away, 

:), yes this might be true.

> and I think that we 
> could use something ASAP.
Sure

> 
> I'm no JMX expert at all, but I understand that basic JMX 
> support can be easily "piggybacked" on existing code, as long 
> as you're basically happy with monitoring and small 
> management tasks: more important needs might require 
> significant changes to the code base, so if I were to draw a 
> plan I would say that we _might_ include some JMX code right 
> now and that we _should_ plan JMX support for 2.2, even if 
> that requires some refactoring. I have the feeling that a 
> complex application like Cocoon really could use some 
> management tools.
> 
Sounds like a good plan!

Carsten


Mime
View raw message