On Tue, 14 Aug 2001, Hiram Chirino wrote:
> I was looking for a way to fill in those description fields that
> DynamicMBeans can fill out. But I did not want to have to replace all the
> JBossMQ MBeans with DynamicMBeans. So this is what I did:
Why not? Aren't DynamicMBeans easier to work with? I am actually a little
confused about the different types, short of the basic MBean that
implements a mgmt interface.
> I created a new class called WrapperMBean and it extends
> NotificationBroadcasterSupport and implements DynamicMBean.
> I changed ServiceMBeanSupport so that it extends this new WrapperMBean.
>
> The WrapperMBean uses reflection to build the basic MBeanInfo object using
> the MBean interface classes. But it arguments it will the description
> information it finds a xxxxMBeanInfo.properties resource file.
Cool.
> I was aming at not having to change how service classes defined thier MBean
> interface (But if you optionaly includes a the xxxxMBeanInfo.properties file
> it would be used). Well.. it almost worked out that way.. but because JMX
> gets a little confused trying to determin if a bean is MBean or a
> DynamicMBean, the reality is that I had to rename my service's xxxxMBean
> interface to xxxxEMBean and also had to add a 'implements DynamicMBean' to
> my service class. This was a real bummer (not so clean)
Why do you need the interface for dynamic?
--jason
_______________________________________________
Jboss-development mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
