<socket-binding name="management-native" interface="management" port="${jboss.management.native.port:9999}"/>

<socket-binding name="management-native" interface="management" port="${jboss.management.native.port:9999}"/>

Maybe, for this particular case; but I'm asking in general, e.g. for IP's which are replaced. BTW, in case I decided to use the properties, are the names final? Are they documented? Thanks, Ondra On Tue, 2012-02-21 at 10:29 +0000, Kabir Khan wrote: > In the testsuite, either is fine (unless we have some tests checking the model for expressions). > However, rather than performing the xslt mentioned to change the ports it sounds simpler to supply the properties when running the tests, e.g. > > <socket-binding name="management-native" interface="management" port="${jboss.management.native.port:9999}"/> > > and -Djboss.management.native.port=<new-value> > > On 21 Feb 2012, at 07:07, Ondrej Zizka wrote: > > > Currently, during XSLT transformation, > > > > <socket-binding name="management-native" interface="management" port="${jboss.management.native.port:9999}"/> > > > > becomes > > > > <socket-binding name="management-native" interface="management" port="<new-value>"/> > > > > Is it ok or do you need it to be > > > > <socket-binding name="management-native" interface="management" port="${jboss.management.native.port:<new-value>}"/> > > > > ? > > > > Ondra > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > jboss-as7-dev mailing list > > jboss-as7-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:jboss-as7-dev@lists.jboss.org> > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-as7-dev > _______________________________________________ jboss-as7-dev mailing list jboss-as7-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-as7-dev