aries-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alasdair Nottingham <>
Subject Re: JMX Proposal
Date Wed, 15 Jun 2011 20:23:38 GMT

I wasn't really trying to say anything about the specification. What I would
like is for the
various spec defined MBeans to be registered in the service registry via the
whiteboard pattern
rather than having the JMX core bundle lookup the MBeanServer and calling
activate MBean.

So I don't want to merge any existing bundles, I like them being separate.
I'm not even sure
I'm saying to change the way the current JMX bundle works. I would like to

1) Update the JMX core project to use the whiteboard pattern so you would
need both core
    and whiteboard bundles to meet the specification
2) Have a second packaging of JMX core which uses the whiteboard pattern


On 15 June 2011 17:24, Felix Meschberger <> wrote:

> Hi Alasdair,
> Am Mittwoch, den 15.06.2011, 14:18 +0100 schrieb Alasdair Nottingham:
> > Hi,
> >
> > We have this new JMX whiteboard component in aries now and I was thinking
> it
> > would be nice if we could either update the JMX spec implementation to
> use
> > the whiteboard pattern, or to provide an alternative packaging which did.
> IMHO whiteboard pattern support is really missing from the spec. So,
> yes, I think the spec should be amended.
> As for packaging: Are you saying to merge the JMX whiteboard bundle
> classes into the JMX core bundle ? I am not so sure. On the one hand I
> like the modularization of these bundles. On the other hand, if this
> goes into the spec, we would sooner or later merge anyway.
> Regards
> Felix
> >
> > What do people think?
> >
> > Thanks
> > Alasdair
> >

Alasdair Nottingham

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message