geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From James Strachan <james_strac...@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject Re: Central piece: to JMX or not to JMX - Avalon
Date Thu, 07 Aug 2003 14:20:03 GMT

On Thursday, August 7, 2003, at 02:57  pm, Alex Blewitt wrote:

>>> I think using Avalon (or Phoenix) is a great idea and something we
>>> should look into.
>>
>> The initial contributors did look into this (see below).
>
> The FAQ from this point is:
>
> "Q: So is Geronimo going to be based on Avalon?
>
> A: To be certified Geronimo needs to fully support JMX and JNDI. So 
> the current plan is to follow the direction of Tomcat 5, Jetty & JBoss 
> and to use MBeans to register & wire the services together along with 
> JNDI.
>
> There are a lot of different 'services frameworks' such as JMX, 
> Avalon, PicoContainer?, Spread, Java Beans etc. The only one we 
> absolutely must support is JMX - so we'll focus on that first. However 
> there is no reason why Geronimo cannot have other kinds of containers 
> dropped in as services (Avalon, PicoContainer? or whatever). From 
> Geronmio's perspective its just a bunch of MBeans.  "
>
> I think that although Geronimo needs to /support/ JMX and JNDI, it 
> doesn't need to be /built/ in terms of JMX and JNDI. So it could (for 
> example) be built on top of Avalon, and have JMX interfaces for the 
> things that need it.
>
> I've already made a post to the effect of Geronimo isA JMX vs. 
> Geronimo hasA JXM interface, and my preference is strongly for the 
> latter.
>
> Has this decision already been taken to base it entirely on JMX ala 
> JBoss?

So far yes. Right now like Tomcat 5, Jetty & JBoss we're using the JMX 
component model for the foreseeable future along with our own lifecycle 
mechanism closely tied with the J2EE deployment & classloader 
mechanisms. Just because another services framework exists it doesn't 
mean we have to use it. Though things may change in the future.

Please give us some time to find our feet & grow - at least let us get 
CVS setup with the initial codebase before commenting on the code that 
you've not seen yet :).

There are lots of things on our plate - but lets not dive in deciding 
which frameworks should be reused before you've studied what we're 
actually doing and so can make a considered judgment on the right thing 
to do for Geronimo, the J2EE container (rather than Avalon).

Remember our aim is to build a kick ass J2EE container - not reuse 
every bit of code we can find.

>  I really don't think that's the right way forward.

Thats a convincing argument :) Why? I wonder why Tomcat 5, JBoss & 
Jetty haven't jumped on Avalon either. Until we get going over here why 
not start there first then come back here later when we're a little 
more up to speed & things are documented & described a little better & 
you've managed to convince Tomcat, Jetty or JBoss to ditch JMX and use 
Avalon instead?

James
-------
http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/


Mime
View raw message