Mailing-List: contact geronimo-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: geronimo-dev@incubator.apache.org
To: geronimo-dev@incubator.apache.org
From: Greg Wilkins <gregw@mortbay.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] JSR77 - 4 managed objects
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2003 11:02:42 +1000
Lines: 42
Message-ID: <bhhbhn$dt9$1@sea.gmane.org>
References: <Sea1-F171N3vSAMfKQu00032e3d@hotmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US;
 rv:1.4) Gecko/20030704 Debian/1.4-1
In-Reply-To: <Sea1-F171N3vSAMfKQu00032e3d@hotmail.com>
Sender: news <news@sea.gmane.org>


I'll let jasons work on the spec module settle a bit and then
look at committing these.

cheers


gianny DAMOUR wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> 
>> These should be interface definitions rather than concrete classes - 
>> there
>> could be a variety of classes implementing them.
> 
> 
> I diagree with this one. It is nice to provide an interface but not 
> required. However, I have refactored the proposed patch.
> 
>> Secondly, there should not need to be any references to 
>> javax.management in
>> them - the intention is that this model can be used by non-Java 
>> clients and
>> so all the attributes should be simple types; for example, the spec 
>> defines
>> the OBJECT_NAME type to be a string.
> 
> 
> I agree with you. My initial intent was to have an implementation which 
> was returning ObjectName. The management application mediator, e.g. 
> MEJB, wich seats between the client and the model, was in charge of 
> extracting from the ObjectName the OBJECT_NAME as a String.
> 
> However, I have refactored the proposed patch.
> 
> Cheers,
> Gianny
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> Hotmail : un compte GRATUIT qui vous suit partout et tout le temps ! 
> http://g.msn.fr/FR1000/9493