[jboss-dev-forums] [Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Re: JBMICROCONT-181 & ManagedDeployments

[scott.stark@jboss.org]

"adrian at jboss.org" wrote : 
  | The business interface managed object would also have a seperate
  | managed object to represent the "*" method (the wildcard).
  | ...
  | 1) The metadata knows whether "*" applies to its specific method.
  | But there should be some way to say it is actually using the "*" managed object
  | and linked to where it is really defined.
  | 
  | 2) The "*" metadata should be able to know where it applies and show
  | what methods will change if it changes. Again these are links.
  | 
I don't view the "*" notation as anything other than a convience for the selection of all methods on the ejb. I don't see that we need to be able to output the same shorthand descriptor. If a descriptor with wildcard mappings is parsed, the resulting metadata is just the collection of methods with the transaction and security attributes the wildcard is associated with mapped onto the methods. If this is serialized back to a descriptor, I don't see a need to be able to collapse the transaction or security assembly sections into a minimal wildcard form.

"adrian at jboss.org" wrote : 
  | 3) It should be possible to create alternate views of this information
  | (again ManagedObjects within the top level managed object that is really
  | just linking). e.g. a view that looks like the transaction-assembly and a view
  | that has it all unwrapped, i.e. one method - one attribute
  | 
  | Of course, this has all got to be described in a generic way such
  | that an admin console can understand it and present it to the user.
  | 
  | e.g. The view managed objects in (3) would have to be marked in some way
  | and probably assigned a "view group" so the admin console and
  | user knows what the alternate views are.
  | 
  | e.g.2 The links described above would need to be marked so it is obvious to the 
  | console/user that the information shown (for convience) is actually coming
  | from somewhere else and they can navigate to where it is really defined.
  | 
  | As you can see, my view of a ManagedObject is not a simple one.
  | It represents a piece of metadata (not necessarily the whole metadata)
  | that knows where it fits in the whole model.
  | It also may not be the only ManagedObject presenting that piece of metadata.
I agree with the notion of views, but this seems more of an admin tool task rather than something the managed objects need to describe themselves. There does need to be an ability to link a ManagedProperty from one ManagedObject/ManagedComponent to another. I added a ManagementComponentRef annotation to allow the deployer writer to describe such relationships. 

View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4067682#4067682

Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4067682