Ok, I'm on it.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Scott Stark Chief Technology Officer JBoss Group, LLC xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Adrian Brock Sent: Monday, January 05, 2004 10:44 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] What is this codeblock in BasicMBeanRegistry On Mon, 2004-01-05 at 18:21, Scott M Stark wrote: > So to move the TCL handling to the invoker, I need the MBeanEntry in > the AbstractMBeanInvoker. This really could replace the current > resource reference since this is encapsulated by the MBeanEntry. > This would have to be looked up during the preRegister call into the > invoker. Anyone see a problem with this change? > This is a change I've been meaning to do for a while. But it never reached the top of my todo list. I don't see any problem with this approach. It would remove this work from the MBeanServer. The only other point of entry into an MBean is for the notifications. But the setting of the TCL isn't supported under the current processing either. The other outstanding issue is whether createMBean or registerMBean without a classloader should be registered with the current TCL. Currently it uses either no classloader or the MBeanServer's classloader. This is for use cases where code running under a Heirarchical Loader Repository registers an MBean using the standard JMX interface. Currently it will not be registered with a classloader from the Heirarchical Loader Repository (which is confusing at best). Regards, Adrian ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials. Become an expert in LINUX or just sharpen your skills. Sign up for IBM's Free Linux Tutorials. Learn everything from the bash shell to sys admin. Click now! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id78&alloc_id371&op=click _______________________________________________ JBoss-Development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
