Paul Hammant wrote, On 21/07/2003 10.27:
Nicola,
If we head down the JMX before Java-interfaces road, we may as well throw away Avalon. It is better that we stick to A-F and automagic wrapping of JMX capability by one of our containers.
Yes, this is an interesting solution, i thought about that too. Basically make our containers be able to run JMX and expose as JMX but not necessarily *be* JMX-based.
- Paul
I have heard more than one say that JMX is what Avalon is and much more.
As a reference they take JBoss, and say that if JBoss runs ok, what's the problem with JMX? [.....]
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
