On Fri, 21 Jun 2002, Christopher K. St. John wrote: > > The beauty about JMX is that you don't have to merge anything. > > > > It's obviously a bit silly to have part of Tomcat 5 > using one set of utilities for JXM, and part using > something else. It definitely makes the code harder > to understand and maintain. > > A good, higher level goal might be: > > - Move towards a single framework for JMX management > of Tomcat 5 components.
Not sure I will agree with this goal. Use the right tool - JMX is the API, but sometimes it makes sense to use model mbeans, sometimes it's better to use dynamic mbeans. I don't think model mbeans can be used for some of the stuff that I want ( in jk ), and I think it is much easier to use the automatic introspection based dynamic mbeans. However the modeler allow more explicit control - so I think both will have to be used when apropriate. What it matters is to follow the same patterns when coding, with getters and setters - and have everything JMX-manageable. The utils and tools should match the situation. Costin -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
