Bram de Kruijff created ACE-347:
-----------------------------------
Summary: Redesign Management Agent
Key: ACE-347
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACE-347
Project: ACE
Issue Type: Bug
Reporter: Bram de Kruijff
Assignee: Bram de Kruijff
The Managent Agent was made "self-contained" in ACE-232 but there are still
some concerns with regard to complexity and functionality. This issue deals
with restructuring the Managent Agent code to make it easier to maintain,
configure and extend. Also see ACE-324 / ACE-324.
Management Agent code:
The MA implementation is setup very modular and it assembled mainly based on CM
factories. Maybe a little too much. The code is scattered over projects making
it hard to maintain and it is violating visibility rules to implementation
classes which is nasty in bndtools.
-> We should centralize the 'dedicated' MA code in the MA project allowing us
to clean up a lot of projects.
Management Agent config:
The fact that we can theoretically reconfigure these services at runtime
through CM does not add much more then a runtime dependency on a CM impl. There
is an obvisou catch-22 in boostrapping and no mechanism to provision these
configurations to a private CM and in fact all configuration is done in code
and it is very complex.
-> we should centralize configuration in a well documented format with a simple
default case and possible extension.
Management Agent extension:
Bringing in extensions or customization on the bundle classpath is very hard on
only partially possible. There is a mechanism to disabled activators and one to
add custom ones. Theoretically one could also provide services from "user
space", but there is no way do do so in a simple way as there are no visible
APIs and the CM catch-22.
-> We should simplify extension on bundle classpath through a simple factory
SPI. Bringing these on the classpath can be done through wrapping (as launcher
does) or maybe also fragment bundles.
-> User space extensions could have a real use case in management/monitoring.
However, this means we need to expose some API. Question is whether we want to
expose prg.apache.ace.* (or some subset) so that consumers can talk to for
exmaple Log directly or that we should facade this behind a single
ManagementAgent API to keep it more contained.
Multiple agents:
There is code to configure and handle multiple agents. Not sure if it really
works as it is a very exotic and possibly undesirable use-case. There are many
conditionals for this through the CM code.
-> At least make it simpler and discuss wither we actually want/need this at
all.
Resource Processors:
RPs need to resolve, typically requiring framework, deploymentadmin (spi) and
eventadmin, but maybe more. In the current situation the MA exports these
package with an additional required attribute (managementagent=true). As a
result standard 3rd party RPs will not resolve. Therefore the MA should be as
self-contained as possible but still export these packages without the
attribute and (re)import them with the appropriate range.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
