geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Jencks <>
Subject Re: svn commit: r963537 - in /geronimo/server/trunk/plugins/connector-1_6/geronimo-connector-builder-1_6/src/main/java/org/apache/geronimo/connector/deployment:
Date Fri, 23 Jul 2010 22:01:50 GMT

On Jul 23, 2010, at 11:24 AM, Jarek Gawor wrote:

> On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 11:57 AM, David Jencks <> wrote:
>>> Yes, I think so - if we want to lookup gbeans in service registry
>>> instead of the kernel registry. We could also revert the code and go
>>> back to old way of doing things. That is, lookup gbeans in kernel
>>> registry for java namespace and register service factories for these
>>> gbeans in service registry for osgi/aries namespace lookups.
>> After thinking about this a bit I think we should register the gbean for the MCF
or ConnectionManager as a service and, for javaee, use a reference that calls a createConnectionFactory()
method on this service.  This is fairly similar to what we used to do before
> David,
> Please correct me if I'm wrong but the change to use aries:services/
> jndi lookup is not really necessary for anything. AFAIK it only really
> provides a nicer integration between osgi and Geronimo. If so, I think
> we should just revert the recent changes and instead focus on more
> pressing issues. If we go with the 2 service idea we have to refactor
> other code (such as the javamail plugin for example) to register the 2
> services. And there might be other places that we have to refactor.

IIUC there are no currently known problems from the current code other than the slightly silly
different-instance requirement so I'd like to mull this over a little more before changing
anything more or reverting.  Do you see a problem with waiting a little longer?

david jencks

> Jarek

View raw message