geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dain Sundstrom <>
Subject Re: ObjectName, j2eeType, and GBeans
Date Mon, 25 Jul 2005 17:00:54 GMT
I think we should consider the object name conventions laid out here:

I like the idea of query by interface, but I doubt it is something we  
want to add before 1.0.


On Jul 24, 2005, at 2:24 PM, Aaron Mulder wrote:

>     So as I'm working on this management interface, I'd like a way to
> identify "all the things that implement X".  Such as, for logging, the
> log configuration GBean, or for web containers, the web container  
> GBean.
> In other areas, the way we've done this is to operate off the  
> j2eeType --
> so if you're looking for a security realm, you look for a j2eeType of
> NameFactory.SECURITY_REALM, and so on.  This only really works if the
> GBean declares a j2eeType in its GBeanInfoBuilder, os otherwise it
> generally ends up with the generic j2eeType of "GBean", and I don't  
> want
> to rely in a specific component name.
>     So, to get to my point, does anyone object to expanding the use of
> j2eeType outside of proper JSR-77 types?  We've already done it for
> security realms (asa I alluded to above) and others, just want to make
> sure no one feels that's a bad policy.
>     An alternative might be for the kernel to remember which GBeans
> implement which interfaces, and then I could search by interface.   
> Or that
> could be done outside the kernel by indexing all GBeans and adding  
> a GBean
> load/unload listener, though that seems a little weird for what  
> would be a
> pretty core GBean identification feature.  These alternatives could  
> have
> the advantage that we're not abusing the "j2eeType" property with  
> values
> outside those explicitly listed in the JSR-77 spec, particularly for
> objects that don't implement J2EEManagedObject.
> Thanks,
>     Aaron

View raw message