commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From cost...@covalent.net
Subject RE: [Configuration] Proposals...
Date Mon, 17 Jun 2002 05:40:57 GMT
On Mon, 17 Jun 2002, Paulo Gaspar wrote:

> > Please note there are 2 important APIs you should look at - JMX and 
> > java preferences. 
> 
> Yeah... although I am not impressed about the Java Preferences thing.
> Is it just me or are SUN APIs going down on quality lately?

I agree java preferences is not the best - and the fact they tied it
to JDK1.4 makes it unacceptable ( for me ).

That's why I think we need some common component that provides the same
functionality, maybe with a better interface, but capable to wrap 
JDK1.4 prefs if 1.4 is detected ( like commons-logging does for logging ).

Like it or not, registry and directory based configuration is
valid and widely used, and IMHO has few benefits. JNDI is far too
complex for that.


> > My view on configuration is that JMX should be used as the main
> > interface for the configurable components, and something similar
> > with java preferences ( but useable in JDK < 1.4 ) for storing/reading
> > the data.
> 
> If you turn that "should" from "...JMX should be used..." into a 
> "could", I would agree.
> 
> I would hate having to use JMX to configure some of my lighter 
> stuff.

I agree, 'could' is the word. 

Actually, at least in a dynamic mbean solution there is no JMX
required - all you do is use plain beans, with the normal patterns,
and you can use an introspection based bean to jmx-enable the 
component if you want to. Modeler is another choice where again
you just write beans, without any deps on jmx.

Costin


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>


Mime
View raw message