RE: [JBoss-dev] Naming a core module?

[Tom E. <te...@e2...>]

I agree that it doesn't make sense to have naming in core.  Actually noted
this in the e-mail I sent out when I made the commit.

However, don't have a solution off-hand for how we can include modules and
jars in remoting (and yet exclude the from core, without removing remoting,
which jmx now depends on).  This will probably become more of problem as the
list of these such things continues to grow, since more and more protocols
(JMS, IIOP, etc.) and detectors (JINI, SLP, etc.) will be added over time.
Already includes SOAP and JNDI, which really don't belong in core.

Best suggestion I can give is to remove remoting from core, create yet
another sub module for jmx remoting which will depend on remoting and jmx
(thus leaving jmx in core without needing remoting).  As you can see, this
makes things much more complex in regards to development, building, and
deploying (which is pretty complex to begin with).  Just have to weigh the
trade-offs.

Whatever the preference, I will be on vacation next week so won't be able to
do anything with it till I get back.

-Tom


> -----Original Message-----
> From: jbo...@li...
> [mailto:jbo...@li...]On
> Behalf Of Jason
> Dillon
> Sent: Saturday, March 08, 2003 4:30 PM
> To: jbo...@li...
> Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] Naming a core module?
>
>
> This is fine until the naming service is rewritten and starts to make
> use of functionality from system or other core modules.  Best
> to avoid
> these sorts of complications.
>
> --jason
>
>
> On Sunday, March 9, 2003, at 04:19 AM, Jeff Haynie wrote:
>
> > Tom did this the other day when he integrated the JNDI detector into
> > remoting, but just for source build dependencies only.
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: jbo...@li...
> > [mailto:jbo...@li...] On Behalf Of
> > Jason Dillon
> > Sent: Saturday, March 08, 2003 4:12 PM
> > To: jbo...@li...
> > Subject: [JBoss-dev] Naming a core module?
> >
> >
> > When did naming become a core module?  Appears that a remoting test
> > depends upon it.  Is this what we really want?  The core is now
> > dependent on naming to build... naming is a service, not part of the
> > core system.  Any way we can fix this so the dependencies are not
> > whack?
> >
> > --jason
> >
> >
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------------
> > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Etnus, makers of TotalView, The
> > debugger
> > for complex code. Debugging C/C++ programs can leave you
> feeling lost
> > and
> > disoriented. TotalView can help you find your way.
> Available on major
> > UNIX
> > and Linux platforms. Try it free. www.etnus.com
> > _______________________________________________
> > Jboss-development mailing list
> Jbo...@li...
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------------
> > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Etnus, makers of TotalView, The
> > debugger
> > for complex code. Debugging C/C++ programs can leave you
> feeling lost
> > and
> > disoriented. TotalView can help you find your way.
> Available on major
> > UNIX
> > and Linux platforms. Try it free. www.etnus.com
> > _______________________________________________
> > Jboss-development mailing list
> > Jbo...@li...
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
> >
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Etnus, makers of
> TotalView, The debugger
> for complex code. Debugging C/C++ programs can leave you
> feeling lost and
> disoriented. TotalView can help you find your way. Available
> on major UNIX
> and Linux platforms. Try it free. www.etnus.com
> _______________________________________________
> Jboss-development mailing list
> Jbo...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
>
>