Juan Carlos Murillo wrote:
> I understood that Avalon was in the process of being replaced by Spring
> as the Container.
I would sooner use the Geronimo microkernel than Spring.
> > However, I don't believe that we want to embed a web container with
JAMES.
> > Rather, I feel that we want to enhance our primitive JMX support, and
have
> > administration tools use that interface.
> I understand the issues for not wanting to embed the servlet container
Actually, I am not sure that everyone yet fully grasps all of the issues.
JAMES is currently a single process, but once we have multiple managed
processes: SMTP handler(s), POP3 handler(s), pipeline processor(s), etc., we
need JMX support embedded in each managed process. For a standalone JAMES,
we could look at embedding the web container in the JAMES process, but that
won't be scalable. We don't want to embed a web container and admin webapp
in each managed process, nor would that provide a satisfactory UI, nor
should a webapp be the only management interface.
What we're look at probably lays out as:
- JMX support w/MBeans embedded in each managed process
- Admin service (model)
- Admin webapp in a web container of the user's choice
- Admin script interface (uses BSF)
where the webapp and script interface are just clients of the admin service.
For Anne's purposes, since she has a defined timeframe and task, as long as
she talks to JMX, we're probably fine, and later refactoring can handle
remaining issues.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
