Hi, Fantastic. Just applpied the patch. I made some modificaitons, namely I moved SubContext to being a top level class as I try to avoid inner classes if possible. Other than that it works like a charm - thanks! It is a much cleaner approach to separating out different layers of management.
At 11:40 PM 7/12/2002 -0700, you wrote: >This patch implements the concept of a 'local' management context that >objects are registered with. I think its better than spreading the JMX >naming scheme in different parts of the code. The big change is the >addition of the getSubContext() method to SystemManager. The contexts are >organized into hierarchy like this: > >Phoenix > Component List > Component 1 > Component 2 > Application List > Application 1 > Block List > Block 1 > Block 2 > Application 2 > Block List > Block 1 > Block 2 > >JMX naming is then derived by 'walking' up to the top level context, which >is the 'real' SystemManager. > >I've tested it with NoOpSystemManager and MX4JSystemManager and haven't >encountered any problems. > >An itemized list of changes: > >org/apache/avalon/phoenix/interfaces/SystemManager.java >- Added method getSubContext( String parent, String type ) to create a >subcontext > >org/apache/avalon/phoenix/components/manager/MX4JSystemManager.java >- Modified naming code slightly to be compatible with new scheme > >org/apache/avalon/phoenix/components/manager/AbstractSystemManager.java >- Added inner class SubContext, which implements SystemManager and acts as >the local context > >org/apache/avalon/phoenix/components/kernel/DefaultKernel.java >- Changed so applications register with the 'application' list context > >org/apache/avalon/phoenix/components/kernel/DefaultApplicationContext.java >- Changed so blocks register with the application's block list context > >org/apache/avalon/phoenix/components/embeddor/DefaultEmbeddor.java >- Changed so components are registered with the component list context > >The diff was made with the cvs diff -u >> patch diff from the >jakarta-avalon-phoenix/src/java directory. I hope this is right - or is >it better to diff each class seperately? > >This is part of the Management Proposal idea i sent out last week. I >think these are the only interfaces changes that are required and all the >rest of the work would be isolated behind SystemManager interface. > >Please let me know what you think. > >- Huw > > >-- >To unsubscribe, >e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >For additional commands, e-mail: ><mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cheers, Peter Donald ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "Faced with the choice between changing one's mind, and proving that there is no need to do so - almost everyone gets busy on the proof." - John Kenneth Galbraith ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
