Hello Sacha,

I thought about it too. As alternative or other implementation of
MBean persistence. Though, I am not familiar with MBean persistence stuff yet.
Are they meant to be serialized as java objects?
I think, having MBeans persisted in xml form is much better. Because I
can see what is persisted and change something manually.

alex

Monday, October 28, 2002, 10:06:36 AM, you wrote:

SL> Hello,

SL> Exactly, it may help to solve one of the current biggest issue wrt
SL> configuration: any configuration done through any GUI (or mbean, etc.) is
not persisted =>> only transient configuration can be started remotly or
SL> programatically. Having a generic way to build new persisted mbean
SL> definition is important.

SL> But we spoke about this on this ML a few weeks ago and we still have some
SL> issues wrt "implicit" dependencies. Anyway, we need a way to persist
SL> configuration that is currently only transient.

SL> cheers,


SL>                         Sacha

>> -----Message d'origine-----
>> De : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> [mailto:jboss-development-admin@;lists.sourceforge.net]De la part de Alex
>> Loubyansky
>> Envoye : lundi, 28 octobre 2002 07:17
>> A : Anatoly Akkerman
>> Objet : Re[2]: [JBoss-dev] -service.xml generator
>>
>>
>> Anatoly, this looks cool and draws other perspectives. I'm in thought.
>>
>> Any other thoughts/comments?
>> Thanks.
>>
>> alex
>>
>> Sunday, October 27, 2002, 4:07:15 PM, you wrote:
>>
>> AA> Hi, Alex
>>
>> AA> Jelly would give you similar ease of use but without having
>> to write any
>> AA> XSL. You would initialize the JellyContext by creating in
>> first and then
>> AA> setting variables in it from attributes like this:
>> AA> ctx.setVariable(name, value);
>>
>> AA> (values can be any Java objects)
>>
>> AA> you load your modified *-service.xml script from a URL into Jelly and
>> AA> run it as a script in the context which you just set up. The
>> result of
>> AA> this operation is XML again.
>>
>> AA> This is simplest usage of Jelly. You do need a library, though, and
>> AA> possibly, not one but a bunch from jakarta-commons.
>>
>> AA> I am using Jelly in a slightly more advanced fashion. I wrote
>> a few very
>> AA> simple tags that allow output of Jelly to be a jar file.
>> Something like:
>> AA> <j:jelly xmlns:j="jelly:core" xmlns:zipper="jelly:mypackage.MyTagLib">
>> AA> <zipper:zip>
>> AA>                 <zipper:entry name="META-INF/ejb-jar.xml" >
>> AA>                         parametrized ejb-jar.xml contents go here
>> AA>                 </zipper:entry>
>> AA>                 <zipper:entry name="META-INF/jboss.xml" >
>> AA>                         parametrized jboss-xml contents go here
>> AA>                 </zipper:entry>
>> AA> </zipper:zip>
>> AA> </j:jelly>
>>
>> AA> Set up the JellyContext for running this script with appropriately
>> AA> configured variables (say from a DB of configurations or from
>> attributes
>> AA> of an MBean). Run the script in the context.
>> AA> After running this script, the JellyContext contains a Jar
>> archive (as a
>> AA> byte[] stored under some variable name) of reconfigured descriptors.
>>
>> AA> The way I use it is to have a servlet that parses its path
>> request and
>> AA> deduces from the path request which script to run and which
>> AA> configuration to pull from storage. The servlet outputs either XML or
>> AA> JAR depending on the requested module and its script.
>>
>> AA> So, you can just point the JBoss deployer to deploy a URL of the kind:
>>
>> AA> myservlet/componentA/configX.jar
>> AA> or
>> AA> myservlet/serviceB/configY.xml
>> AA> and the servlet automatically generates properly configured jar or xml
>> AA> which the Deployer happily deploys.
>>
>> AA> Jelly has many usages this is just what I could come up with.
>> It would
>> AA> be more than adequate for what you need to do, but if you are
>> AA> dissatisfied with JBoss library dependency growth, then,
>> Jelly is out of
>> AA> the picture.
>>
>> AA> Alex Loubyansky wrote:
>> >> Thanks, Anatoly. I'll check it. Also I thought about Velocity which
>> >> looks similar to Jelly from your description, though I am not familiar
>> >> with the last one.
>> >>
>> >> Could you, please, look at the following idea with XML/XSL, compare it
>> >> with Jelly and give your opinion?
>> >> - before transformation, each MBean's attribute is set as a
>> parameter to
>> >> the Transformer with Transformer.setParameter(...) with the name equal
>> >> to the corresponding parameter name used in XSL stylesheet;
>> >> - transform XML template with Transformer and XSL stylesheet.
>> >>
>> >> As for me, XML/XSL requires two templates (XML and XSL) while
>> >> Jelly/Velocity requires only one.
>> >>
>> >> Also, I wouldn't add any thirdparty library unless it really
>> helps. The
>> >> JBoss becomes so heavy. I think it's problem.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Best regards,
>>  Alex Loubyansky
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -------------------------------------------------------
>> This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
>> Welcome to geek heaven.
>> http://thinkgeek.com/sf
>> _______________________________________________
>> Jboss-development mailing list
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
>>

-- 
Best regards,
 Alex Loubyansky




-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
_______________________________________________
Jboss-development mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development

Reply via email to