Re: [Openjmx-devel] [Fwd: JMX work, and CustomerBMPBean]

SourceForge Headquarters 1320 Columbia Street Suite 310 San Diego, CA 92101 +1 (858) 422-6466

On Tuesday 05 February 2002 23:03, Dmitri Colebatch wrote:
> sorry about that - fixed in CVS now.
Thanks a lot

I'll commit the new version to openjmx cvs

>
> cheers
> dim
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Carlos Quiroz" <car...@we...>
> To: <ope...@li...>
> Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2002 7:34 AM
> Subject: Re: [Openjmx-devel] [Fwd: JMX work, and CustomerBMPBean]
>
> On Tuesday 05 February 2002 00:07, Dmitri Colebatch wrote:
> > ahh shit... I didn't do a clean build, although I didn't change any
> > classes, only templates, so it shouldn't be an issue.  If you still h=
ave
> > a copy of a working jar, then just find the openjmx-descriptor.j temp=
late
> > (named something like that) and replace it with the one in XDoclet cv=
s.
> >
> > I really do need to put that doco in dont I.  let me know if the
> > following doesn't seem logical:
> >
> > @jmx:mbean defines things that are related to the spec.  Its presence
> > indicates that a MyServiceMBean interface will be created for the
>
> MyService
>
> > class.  the extends parameter specifies an interface for the
>
> MyServiceMBean
>
> > interface to extend.
> >
> > @openjmx:description defines things that are related to the openjmx
> > description adaptor class.  The absense of it means that all defaults
> > will be followed for the openjmx description class.  Its extends
> > parameter allows the description class to extend a specific class - t=
his
> > class
>
> should
>
> > itself extend the openjmx abstract description class.  If it is not
> > there, and the MyService class extends FooService, then the
> > MyServiceMBeanDescription class will extend FooServiceMBeanDescriptio=
n
>
> (are
>
> > they the right class names?).  If there is no @openjmx:descriptione
> > extends=3D"" _and_ MyService doesn't extend anything, then
> > MyServiceMBeanDescription will simply extend the OpenJMX abstract
> > description class (sorry - cant remember the name).
>
> Hi sorry to bother you again. I did a built from CVS just a few moments=
 ago
> and almost everything seems to work however
> @openjmx:description extends=3D"" will produce a class
>
> MyServiceMBeanDescription extends Description
>
> and
> @openjmx:description extends=3D"anything" will produce a class
>
> MyServiceMBeanDescription extends anythingDescription
>
> In the first case it should extend MBeanDescriptionAdaptor (notice that
> this works fine if no @openjmx tag is present)
> In the second case class should extend anything
>
> Regards
>
> > I'll do this in doco format, and it should seem clearer - any input i=
s
> > welcome (o:
> >
> > cheers
> > dim
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Carlos Quiroz" <car...@we...>
> > To: <ope...@li...>
> > Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2002 8:44 AM
> > Subject: Re: [Openjmx-devel] [Fwd: JMX work, and CustomerBMPBean]
> >
> > On Monday 04 February 2002 23:07, Dmitri Colebatch wrote:
> > > Ok - have a look in XDoclet CVS.
> > >
> > > example usage:
> > >
> > > /**
> > >  * Sample MBean implementation.
> > >  * @jmx:mbean name=3D":service=3DMyService" description=3D"My wonde=
rful
> > > service." * @openjmx:description extends=3D"AbstractMBeanDescriptio=
n"
> > >  */
> > >
> > > Over next weekend, I'll get the XDoclet side of the docs done so th=
at
> > > this is all a little bit more "proper" (o:
> >
> > Thanks a lot Dimitri...
> >
> > What is the name in jmx:mbean doing? Do you still have the jmx:mbean
> > extends?
> >
> > I can't build it from CVS because of some serialveruid classes which
> > don't compile, any idea?
> >
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > > cheers
> > > dim
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "J=E9r=F4me BERNARD" <jer...@xt...>
> > > To: <ope...@li...>
> > > Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2002 1:10 AM
> > > Subject: Re: [Openjmx-devel] [Fwd: JMX work, and CustomerBMPBean]
> > >
> > >
> > > Sounds good for me too.
> > >
> > > Jerome.
> > >
> > > Carlos Quiroz wrote:
> > > >>-----Original Message-----
> > > >>From: Dmitri Colebatch [mailto:di...@bi...]
> > > >>Sent: 04 February 2002 13:47
> > > >>To: J=E9r=F4me BERNARD; ope...@li...
> > > >>Subject: Re: [Openjmx-devel] [Fwd: JMX work, and CustomerBMPBean]
> > > >>
> > > >>Given that the description class is specific to OpenJMX and the
> > > >
> > > >interface
> > > >
> > > >>is
> > > >>a spec thing, I would suggest keeping the current tag for the usu=
al
> > > >>scenario
> > > >>(as you described), but allowing an optional @openjmx:description
> > > >>extends=3D""
> > > >>for overriding this default behaviour.
> > > >>
> > > >>if you guys are agreeable with this I can check it into XDoclet c=
vs
> > > >>straight
> > > >>away.
> > > >
> > > >I think this would be pretty OK
> > > >
> > > >>cheesr
> > > >>dim
> > > >>
> > > >>----- Original Message -----
> > > >>From: "J=E9r=F4me BERNARD" <jer...@xt...>
> > > >>To: <ope...@li...>
> > > >>Sent: Monday, February 04, 2002 9:20 PM
> > > >>Subject: Re: [Openjmx-devel] [Fwd: JMX work, and CustomerBMPBean]
> > > >>
> > > >>Carlos Quiroz wrote:
> > > >>>On Sunday 03 February 2002 20:43, J=E9r=F4me BERNARD wrote:
> > > >>>>What bug do you have?
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>I think there a no changes planned in XDoclet. We will just add=
 an
> > > >>
> > > >>example
> > > >>
> > > >>>>and that's it.
> > > >>>>So if there is still something wrong, let me know and I will fi=
x it
> > > >
> > > >ASAP.
> > > >
> > > >>>Again with the extend=3D"XXX" which is expanded on the
> > > >>> MBeanDescription
> > > >>
> > > >>class
> > > >>
> > > >>>to extends XXXMBeanDescription
> > > >>>
> > > >>>Now thinking a second time about it is maybe be design, is it? B=
ut
> > > >>
> > > >>assumes
> > > >>
> > > >>>that your extended interface also has a Description class
> > > >>
> > > >>Yes. This is a design reason. I supposed that the class which wou=
ld
> > > >> be extended would be a MBeanDescription class too. This is also
> > > >> because I found it easier to have only one extends attribute on =
the
> > > >> jmx:mbean
> > > >
> > > >tag
> > > >
> > > >>rather than having two (one for the interface and one for the
> > > >>description) because I think that most of the cases will have a
> > > >>description extending another one.
> > > >>
> > > >>What would you prefer/propose to do?
> > > >>
> > > >>Jerome.
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>_______________________________________________
> > > >>Openjmx-devel mailing list
> > > >>Ope...@li...
> > > >>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openjmx-devel
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>_______________________________________________
> > > >>Openjmx-devel mailing list
> > > >>Ope...@li...
> > > >>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openjmx-devel
> > > >
> > > >_______________________________________________
> > > >Openjmx-devel mailing list
> > > >Ope...@li...
> > > >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openjmx-devel
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Openjmx-devel mailing list
> > > Ope...@li...
> > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openjmx-devel
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Openjmx-devel mailing list
> > > Ope...@li...
> > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openjmx-devel
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Openjmx-devel mailing list
> > Ope...@li...
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openjmx-devel
>
> _______________________________________________
> Openjmx-devel mailing list
> Ope...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openjmx-devel