From: <ad...@jb...> - 2005-04-28 02:03:42
|
"bil...@jb..." wrote : | I thought your original proposal was to write your own AOP abstraction SPI that AOP had to somehow fit into, or to write your own "lightweight" AOP model to support all the JMX stuff. | That was actually a later argument on whether we should support other peoples invocation models which we rejected. The JMX stuff was about mapping jmx invocations JMXGetAttribute("UpperCaseStyle") to AOPMethodInvocation("getUpperCaseStyle"); which we also rejected as too complicated and unnecessary since a DynamicMBean can do this without the need for JMXGetAttribute objects. View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3875704#3875704 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3875704 |