RE: [Openjmx-devel] NotificationBroadcaster interface - removeNotificationListener() method

[Bordet, S. <Sim...@co...>]

Hi Tom,

> I have been working with the JMX Reference Implementation to=20
> build some
> additional features (similar to the JDMK).  I have everything=20
> working using
> the JMX RI and found your implementation. =20

Be aware that coding against the RI is very different from coding =
against the JMX spec. Many threads have been discussed here that start =
with "cannot run this in OpenJMX, it runs in the RI, why ?" and that =
ends up with "a bug in the RI".

> I found that your version of the
> NotificationBroadcaster interface has 3 method signatures for
> removeNotificationListener() and the JMX RI implementation=20
> has 1.  After
> looking at the JMX spec., it says that:
>=20
> "This method takes a reference to a NotificationListener=20
> object, as well as
> a hand-back object."
>=20
> The JMX RI implementation isn't even correct, in it only takes the
> NotificationListener as a parameter.  I know the specs. are vague, but
> wondering why you added the extra ones?

Because they are very much needed :)
Furthermore, the spec should upgrade and fix this mess: the only way I =
see not to break the already written code is to add the spec compliant =
method and/or the third one, that was missed by the spec writers, but is =
indeed needed.
For further info, you can look in the archives of this mailing list, or =
in the ones of jmx...@ja..., where this issue has been =
discusses in detail.

> P.S.  Also wondering if there are any future plans to add=20
> some of the extra
> features as in the JDMK to OpenJMX in the future, or will you=20
> wait till
> solid specs. are release on these types of features (i.e.=20
> Cascading Agents,
> auto-detection, etc.)?

For what pertain JSR 160, I guess we will wait the spec, even if I'm on =
the expert group for that JSR.
For other feautures such as SNMP support and other stuff, we are wide =
open to contributions.

Regards

Simon