Re: [infinispan-dev] [ISPN-134] Creating @Jopr* annotations or extending @Managed* ones?

Hi Galder, Am 30.09.2009 um 11:51 schrieb Galder Zamarreno: > two are measurement metrics, the two below are trait metrics. So, on > top > of jopr adding new fields, there's the issue that not all > @ManagedAttribute map to the same thing on the jopr side. Yes. This would e.g. need an attribute of "dataType" > So, my suggestion would be to have some jopr specific annotations > that > allow us to differentiate between different jopr types (i.e. > @JoprMetric(dataType="measurement"), @JoprMetric(dataType="trait")) > and > where we can add any extra information required by jopr, i.e. > displayName...etc. > Good idea. > I think using this annotations would be cleaner than extending > @Managed* > ones. Also, such @Jopr* or annotations would need to live in core/ > > Heiko, does Jopr have annotations like this already? No we don't Actually I'd love to see that within $RHQ/modules/helpers so that other projects can pick it up to define their plugin descriptors too. This could perhaps live in the plugin generator, where a phase after defining the properties of a server/service would be to ask the questions "shall I scan for annotations to create metrics" and then "please pass a package/classes mask for the classes to use". This would then go out, gather all that data and populate the <metric> tags along with "if (req.getName().equals("xxx") .. { " blocks in getValues() Same could happen for some @RhqOperation and @RhqConfiguration (for resource configuration bits) too.