james-server-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Bernd Fondermann <bf_...@brainlounge.de>
Subject Re: JMX, trunk and experiments!
Date Thu, 05 Jul 2007 11:26:49 GMT
Ahmed Mohombe wrote:
>> While IMAP does define sufficient defaults (mostly the port) JMX has 
>> many configuration options (built-in JMX server vs. third party, 
>> authentication vs. no authenticaion, credentials, IP-bindings, ports, 
>> protocols...). 
> You are the developers of JAMES so you *can* define JMX defaults too (in 
> the context of JAMES), that you consider are a "best practice" or are 
> better suited for your users.

"Best practice" is better defined by the users of JAMES.
What configuration would you like?

>> Do you see any reasonable defaults?
> Yes, I do: the configuration that requires the smallest work amount from 
> the user.
> Also don't forget that this is for "experiments" and that you want users 
> to give it a try (and not get scared by the impossibility to get it work).
> So a minimal setup with JDK 1.5 JConsole and the JDK JMX server will 
> just do it as long as it "just works out of the box", and there's a 
> short description that describes *just* the steps needed to make it work.

You are more than welcome to provide a patch. I will look into it promptly.

The tricky part, as Stefano mentioned, is that we have to adjust 
kernel.xml. Having this working "out of the box" without breakages in 
JDK 1.4 or other scenarios seems to require some work.

In a Spring Framework deployment this probably becomes much easier, 
since Spring supports JMX better than Phoenix. That would be my personal 
priority to work on at the moment.

> Thanks in advance,
> Ahmed.

Thank you,


To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-help@james.apache.org

View raw message