JMX provides instrumentation capabilities, and standard services, one of the standard services is the loading/un-load of archives using the MLet service.
There is a strong rumour you've already finished the kernel Pier ... if so share I'm dying to see it.
If not, then please have a look at the MLet capabilities for loading and unloading. I think loading and MD5Url using the MLet loader would be a good thing and since it is already built for us in MX4J as a standard service ... why recreate it unless you find problems with the concept as defined by JMX. JMX is a bit more than just an SNMP agent of sorts.
Cheers, Thor HW
On 29-Mar-04, at 9:26 AM, Pier Fumagalli wrote:
On 29 Mar 2004, at 17:20, Hamilton Verissimo de Oliveira (Engenharia - SPO) wrote:De: Stefano Mazzocchi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Yes, totally. And we already have it working and solved with this new
container. Why would we trash it to move to JMX? what would that buy us?
Would you put an instrumentation layer on it? If yes, then consider JMX.
I believe that we all agreed that the core should be instrumentable by JMX. I believe there's some confusion here between "instrumenting" the Cocoon kernel with JMX and using JMX _as_ the core kernel of Cocoon.
I still believe that for Cocoon the first solution is the optimal one, using a Cocoon-tailored kernel, instrumentable with JMX...
Pier
