On 07/02/2011 04:11 PM, Scott Marlow wrote:
On 07/02/2011 12:33 PM, David M. Lloyd wrote:
>
> The name "java:DefaultDS" should be invalid. The reason we should treat
> these names specially is that we can not be sure that future EE
> specifications will or will not introduce additional namespaces than the
> four we know today.
>
> Like I said before, we should be following these rules:
>
> 1) Unqualified relative names like "DefaultDS" or
"jdbc/DefaultDS"
> should be qualified relative to "java:comp/env",
"java:module/env", or
> "java:jboss/env", depending on the context.
>
> 2) Unqualified "absolute" names like "/jdbc/DefaultDS" should be
> qualified relative to a "java:jboss/root" name.
>
> 3) Qualified "absolute" names like "java:/jdbc/DefaultDS" should
be
> qualified the same way as #2.
>
> 4) The special "java:jboss" namespace is shared across the entire AS
> server instance.
>
> 5) Any "relative" name with a "java:" lead-in must be in one of
the five
> namespaces: "comp", "module", "app",
"global", or our proprietary
> "jboss". Any name starting with "java:xxx" where "xxx"
is a name which
> is not equal to one of the above five would result in an invalid name error.
To address AS7-1171, we should give an invalid name error message (at
least when we add the datasource). I'll change the jira to reflect that.
AS7-1171 is updated to reflect this.
>
> This allows us to have predictable and consistent rules for every name
> bound in the AS. It also lets us define additional namespaces as specs
> evolve without running into compatibility problems.
_______________________________________________
jboss-as7-dev mailing list
jboss-as7-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-as7-dev