January 2007 - jboss-dev-forums - Jboss List Archives

[Design of Messaging on JBoss (Messaging/JBoss)] - Re: Bug in transactional delivery in an MDB

by ovidiu.feodorov＠jboss.com

Counterintuitive as it sounds, "lock and load" it is actually technically correct: On page 21 of the "M1 Garand Manual" the procedure for preparing the M1 Garand for firing is to "pull the operating rod handle to the rear until the bolt is securely LOCKED open". Then you load the clip. This indicates that first lock and then load is indeed the order of inserting a cartridge clip into the M1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lock_and_load View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4000565#4000565 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4000565

19 years, 2 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of Messaging on JBoss (Messaging/JBoss)] - Re: Bug in transactional delivery in an MDB

by weston.price＠jboss.com

:-) Yeah, I guess you are right...doesn't sound as cool though. Guys, let me know if there is anything on the JCA side that I can clarify. Sounds like we are on the right track. Now, if we can just put a muzzle on Tim, we should be all set. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4000557#4000557 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4000557

19 years, 2 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of Messaging on JBoss (Messaging/JBoss)] - Re: Channels no longer manage deliveries

by ovidiu.feodorov＠jboss.com

Thanks for the note. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4000552#4000552 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4000552

19 years, 2 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of POJO Server] - Re: bean/mbean integration issue

by alesj

anonymous wrote : | The main downside is that the Bus can in principle invoke on things | that are registered directly (or indirectly via a KernelRegistryPlugin) | that don't have a context in the controller per-se, but there is already | "a hack" in the controller that knows how to make it seem these | have a context. | What's the 'hack'? anonymous wrote : | Forums == dicussions | JIRA == what we decided needs doing | ;-) "adrian(a)jboss.org" wrote : The issue you mentioned above is a holder issue for these type of issues. | i.e. in this case the missing feature is being able to "install" MBeans into POJOs | and vice-versa. Yes. I'll just change the issue Summary then. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4000503#4000503 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4000503

19 years, 2 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Re: Retrowoven container project

by kabir.khan＠jboss.com

http://jira.jboss.com/jira/browse/JBBUILD-333 Javassist doesn't seem to have any built in support for the types, but they seem to be tied in somehow with the Signature attribute. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4000499#4000499 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4000499

19 years, 2 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss Reporting] - BIRTIntegration question

by gregora

i am trying to follow the instructions at http://labs.jboss.com/wiki/BIRTIntegration to include BIRT sar file in jBoss deploy directory. the instructions say i have to: "Download engine-BIRT-xxx.sar , where xxx is the latest version number ( At the time of this writing , it is 0.2-SNAPSHOT )" where can i download this file from (URL would be nice)? thank you View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4000487#4000487 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4000487

19 years, 2 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of POJO Server] - Re: bean/mbean integration issue

by adrian＠jboss.org

The issue you mentioned above is a holder issue for these type of issues. i.e. in this case the missing feature is being able to "install" MBeans into POJOs and vice-versa. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4000486#4000486 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4000486

19 years, 2 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of POJO Server] - Re: bean/mbean integration issue

by adrian＠jboss.org

The kernel bus hasn't really had any work done on it. The original idea was that it would provide a generic entry point for invocations on different contexts, e.g. Properyt/MethodJoinpoints for POJOs Attributre/OperationJoinpoints for JMX. Its main use would be to replace the Dispatcher (AOP remoting) and org.jboss.system.Registry (JBossAS's detyped invokers) as a common entry point for named based invocations. However, I agreed with Bill about 2 years ago that rewriting AOP and JMX to support a common Joinpoint abstraction would be a lot of work. If it is to be done at all it would left to a later iteration. Scott's idea of adding a "dispatch" abstract to the context api would work. In fact, I really want to change the BeanInfo api to support this notion like the ClassInfo api already does (i.e. there get/set methods on fields and invoke on methods). The api would be more like the DynamicMBean api where there are methods to get/set Properties/Attributes and invoke on methods/operations with each context knowing how to do this, e.g. ServiceControllerContext -> MBeanServer KernelControllerContext -> Configurator (or in future as I said above BeanInfo) This later approach essentially moves the implementation of the Bus from a joinpoint based abstraction to a context based abstract. The main downside is that the Bus can in principle invoke on things that are registered directly (or indirectly via a KernelRegistryPlugin) that don't have a context in the controller per-se, but there is already "a hack" in the controller that knows how to make it seem these have a context. P.S. It is better to create JIRA issues when we have discussed the issue and agreed what we want to do. Forums == dicussions JIRA == what we decided needs doing View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4000485#4000485 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4000485

19 years, 2 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss Web Services] - JBWS-1259 - element ref and type qnames

by darran.lofthouse＠jboss.com

>From the following schema: - | <schema targetNamespace='http://test.jboss.org/ws/jbws1259/types' xmlns='http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema' xmlns:soap11-enc='http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/' xmlns:tns='http://test.jboss.org/ws/jbws1259/types' xmlns:xsi='http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance'> | | <complexType name='Person'> | <sequence> | <element name='firstName' nillable='true' type='string'/> | <element name='surname' nillable='true' type='string'/> | <element ref='tns:comment'/> | </sequence> | </complexType> | | <complexType name='TelephoneNumber'> | <sequence> | <element name='areaCode' nillable='true' type='string'/> | <element name='number' nillable='true' type='string'/> | <element ref='tns:comment'/> | </sequence> | </complexType> | | <element name='comment'> | <complexType> | <sequence> | <element name='test' type='string' /> | <element ref='tns:comment' /> | </sequence> | </complexType> | </element> | | <element name='lookup' type='tns:Person' /> | <element name='lookupResponse' type='tns:TelephoneNumber'/> | </schema> wscompile generates the following mapping for comment: - | <java-xml-type-mapping> | <java-type>org.jboss.test.ws.jbws1259.Comment</java-type> | <anonymous-type-qname xmlns:typeNS='http://test.jboss.org/ws/jbws1259/types'>typeNS:>Person>comment</anonymous-type-qname> | <qname-scope>complexType</qname-scope> | <variable-mapping> | <java-variable-name>test</java-variable-name> | <xml-element-name>test</xml-element-name> | </variable-mapping> | <variable-mapping> | <java-variable-name>comment</java-variable-name> | <xml-element-name>comment</xml-element-name> | </variable-mapping> | </java-xml-type-mapping> We generate the following mapping (different qname because of the order we create the mappings): - | <java-xml-type-mapping> | <java-type>org.jboss.test.ws.jbws1259.Comment</java-type> | <anonymous-type-qname>http://test.jboss.org/ws/jbws1259/types:>TelephoneNumber>comment</anonymous-type-qname> | <qname-scope>complexType</qname-scope> | <variable-mapping> | <java-variable-name>test</java-variable-name> | <xml-element-name>test</xml-element-name> | </variable-mapping> | <variable-mapping> | <java-variable-name>comment</java-variable-name> | <xml-element-name>comment</xml-element-name> | </variable-mapping> | </java-xml-type-mapping> Looking at the Web Services for J2EE specification section 7.3.2.2 I think both of these are wrong, shouldn't this be mapped according to use case 4? e.g. <anonymous-type-qname>http://test.jboss.org/ws/jbws1259/types:>comment</anonymous-type-qname> View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4000475#4000475 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4000475

19 years, 2 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of POJO Server] - Re: bean/mbean integration issue

by alesj

"adrian(a)jboss.org" wrote : | This was the original intention of the KernelBus notion, | but the Service model doesn't currently have a "Joinpoint" abstraction. | How did you envision KernelBus notion with this issue? "adrian(a)jboss.org" wrote : | I have already asked Ales to go through these actions classes to remove | the "logic" into delegate classes. I think this falls under that work? You mean plugable 'joinpoint' delegate, regarding what the Context is - KernelControllerC, ServiceControllerC, ... Can you create a JIRA task for this issue with some info (assigning it to me)? What about http://jira.jboss.com/jira/browse/JBMICROCONT-135? This was my first understanding about Service to Kernel abstraction that we talked about. Probably not much to do in this area? I'll still take a look what else can we port to Services. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4000463#4000463 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4000463

19 years, 2 months

1
0
0 / 0

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

jboss-dev-forums January 2007