On 31/01/2010 23:02, Sebastien Bahloul wrote:
Hi guys,
(sorry for the previous incomplete mail)
I've introduced a JMX server / agent skeleton and I needed to represent
configuration objects. Before commiting it inside the trunk, I think you have
to look at it because it introduces a Task object containing all settings and
reference to other objects like services and syncoptions and has impacts in
*Synchronize classes
Hi Seb,
The JMX part of this looks very interesting, I really look forward to
seeing it fully functional!
However, your patch clearly mixes two very separate things:
1) JMX
2) Configuration storage in Java objects
There have been many discussions about changing the configuration format
(properties, XML, YML, etc) recently. Depending on how this is done,
this may imply changing the Java objects used to store configuration...
So far, this is discussed in issues #18 and #102
(http://tools.lsc-project.org/issues/show/18).
If we want to move forward on a healthy basis, we MUST agree upon a
configuration format and it's storage in Java objects before anything
else now.
Configuration is a very central part of LSC, we can't ignore this step
any longer, or lots of work will be duplicated, as your patch clearly shows.
Of course, we should get this done as soon as possible, to avoid being
blocked by it any more. A new format has been proposed in #18, but there
is no feedback yet. I'm the first to blame, and will give it a good look
this afternoon. Let's start down this road.
Jonathan
--
--------------------------------------------------------------
Jonathan Clarke - [email protected]
--------------------------------------------------------------
Ldap Synchronization Connector (LSC) - http://lsc-project.org
--------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________________________
Ldap Synchronization Connector (LSC) - http://lsc-project.org
lsc-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.lsc-project.org/listinfo/lsc-dev
