|marc fleury wrote:
|> |extend ServiceMBean with these methods and call it DeployerMBean? Why
|> |not create an abstract implementation of this called
|> |DeployerMBeanSupport that converts the strings to URLs and keeps tracks
|> |of which URLs have been deployed? Doing this would make life easier for
|> |people wanting to add deployers for different kinds of modules (such as
|> |resource adapters).
|>
|> Ok so a specific "deployment aware" service would register with the
|> "DeployerMBeanSupport" and upon deployment you call everyone?
|
|No, I think he meant make a subclass of ServiceMBeanSupport, and have
|deployment service subclass it to ensure that they implement the
|"deployment interface" and also get a default impl. for it.
Ok yes, that is what he meant by "DeployerMBeanSupport" as the basic
interface for Services that are "DeploymentAware".
So I can be more precise and say that we would register the
"DeployerMBeanSupport" MBeans with a new J2EE Deployer.
Today we need ad-hoc "Deployers" (as in J2EE Deployer) that takes a
JSP/Servlet and the EJB stack. Now that we have a generic interface we
could stack them up in our generalized J2EE Deployer, the only problem that
remains is "what type of file do you take"... and that would need to be
specified in the MBean (getExtensionType()) so we could configure it with
the new jcml files :)
he he
marc
|
|/Rickard
|
|--
|Rickard �berg
|
|Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|
|
