You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to phoenix-dev@avalon.apache.org by Paul Hammant <Pa...@yahoo.com> on 2002/08/01 23:10:07 UTC
MX4J
Folks,
Given we have narrowed to a single JMX implementation (for now at
least), could we include it in our lib/ CVS dir?
We need not enable it in kernel.conf, but it will be a good thing
considering the need to build distributions.
- Paul
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: MX4J
Posted by Paul Hammant <Pa...@yahoo.com>.
Peter,
>
>
>>Folks,
>>
>>Given we have narrowed to a single JMX implementation (for now at
>>least), could we include it in our lib/ CVS dir?
>>
>>
>
>If you want. I prefer to keep it separate but this is the third request to add
>it in to CVS that I have got in last week so ... go ahead ;)
>
>
:-)
>>We need not enable it in kernel.conf, but it will be a good thing
>>considering the need to build distributions.
>>
>>
>
>We may want to enable it via a property in a similar way to how you switch
>between kernels with a property. Maybe?
>
A done deal.
-ph
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: MX4J
Posted by Peter Donald <pe...@apache.org>.
On Sun, 4 Aug 2002 04:23, Paul Hammant wrote:
> That is kinda my impression too. Should I make an approach to the MX4J
> team and mention this? One always risks flaming for this, but I feel we
> should given them a heads up.
Already spoke to the guy. He was on JMX EG so he was going to ask the spec
lead if it can be one of the blessed APIs, I also asked that apache JCP rep
to see if he can get it on blessed list as did the TC people I believe. So it
should be safe using it.
> The ideal world is that they are dependant on the real JMX API and have
> their own impl.
Unfortunately they can not depend upon the "API" because the RI API is buggy.
Unlike some products the JMX API is not just made up of interfaces but is
made up of classes that do stuff (ie ModelMBeans for one).
--
Cheers,
Peter Donald
Duct tape is like the force. It has a light side, and a dark side, and
it binds the universe together ...
-- Carl Zwanzig
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: MX4J
Posted by Paul Hammant <Pa...@yahoo.com>.
Peter,
>>I am not sure they have permission to fork or clean-room
>>reverse-engineer Sun's JMX source :
>>
>>
>>http://cvs.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/mx4j/mx4j/src/core/javax/man
>>agement/
>>
>>I am not sure we have the right to include their compiled JMX API jar in
>>our CVS lib directory.
>>
>>Advice..?
>>
>>
>
>Currently it is no different than servlet/xml apis that apache implements as I
>don't think any of them are legal yet. I believe Apache was going to be
>granted permission to implement a bunch of APIs like servlet, and xml ones.
>Not sure it has been actioned yet. However JMX is not part of blessed apis so
>it wont be "legal" even then. However TC relies on it so I expect it will be
>in future. I would put it in but up to you ;)
>
>
That is kinda my impression too. Should I make an approach to the MX4J
team and mention this? One always risks flaming for this, but I feel we
should given them a heads up.
The ideal world is that they are dependant on the real JMX API and have
their own impl. There could, however, be a compelling reason as to why
they have essentially forked the API.
- Paul
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: MX4J
Posted by Peter Donald <pe...@apache.org>.
On Sat, 3 Aug 2002 22:32, Paul Hammant wrote:
> Peter,
>
> >>Given we have narrowed to a single JMX implementation (for now at
> >>least), could we include it in our lib/ CVS dir?
> >
> >If you want. I prefer to keep it separate but this is the third request to
> > add it in to CVS that I have got in last week so ... go ahead ;)
>
> I am not sure they have permission to fork or clean-room
> reverse-engineer Sun's JMX source :
>
>
> http://cvs.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/mx4j/mx4j/src/core/javax/man
>agement/
>
> I am not sure we have the right to include their compiled JMX API jar in
> our CVS lib directory.
>
> Advice..?
Currently it is no different than servlet/xml apis that apache implements as I
don't think any of them are legal yet. I believe Apache was going to be
granted permission to implement a bunch of APIs like servlet, and xml ones.
Not sure it has been actioned yet. However JMX is not part of blessed apis so
it wont be "legal" even then. However TC relies on it so I expect it will be
in future. I would put it in but up to you ;)
--
Cheers,
Peter Donald
---------------------------------------------------
"It is easy to dodge our responsibilities, but we
cannot dodge the consequences of dodging our
responsibilities." -Josiah Stamp
---------------------------------------------------
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: MX4J
Posted by Paul Hammant <Pa...@yahoo.com>.
Peter,
>>Given we have narrowed to a single JMX implementation (for now at
>>least), could we include it in our lib/ CVS dir?
>>
>>
>
>If you want. I prefer to keep it separate but this is the third request to add
>it in to CVS that I have got in last week so ... go ahead ;)
>
>
I am not sure they have permission to fork or clean-room
reverse-engineer Sun's JMX source :
http://cvs.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/mx4j/mx4j/src/core/javax/management/
I am not sure we have the right to include their compiled JMX API jar in
our CVS lib directory.
Advice..?
- Paul
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: MX4J
Posted by Peter Donald <pe...@apache.org>.
On Fri, 2 Aug 2002 07:10, Paul Hammant wrote:
> Folks,
>
> Given we have narrowed to a single JMX implementation (for now at
> least), could we include it in our lib/ CVS dir?
If you want. I prefer to keep it separate but this is the third request to add
it in to CVS that I have got in last week so ... go ahead ;)
> We need not enable it in kernel.conf, but it will be a good thing
> considering the need to build distributions.
We may want to enable it via a property in a similar way to how you switch
between kernels with a property. Maybe?
--
Cheers,
Peter Donald
---------------------------------------------------
"Wise men don't need advice. Fools don't take it."
-Benjamin Franklin
---------------------------------------------------
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>