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

[Design of JBoss ESB] - Re: quickstart more_action = custom_action

by mark.little＠jboss.com

Check with Len. It'll affect him more than anything, so if he's ok with it JFDI ;-) View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4070798#4070798 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4070798

16 years, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss ESB] - Re: quickstart more_action = custom_action

by burrsutter

http://jira.jboss.com/jira/browse/JBESB-778 I plan to work on this but I realize it might impact the QE folks who are wiring the quickstarts into a test harness. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4070785#4070785 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4070785

16 years, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss ESB] - quickstart more_action = custom_action

by burrsutter

The current quickstart called more_action should be renamed to "custom_action" since that is its focus, to illustrate how someone creates a configurable custom action. We should also add in a BeanConfiguredAction example to this quickstart. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4070784#4070784 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4070784

16 years, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss jBPM] - Re: Failure handling

by bill.burke＠jboss.com

Srry...let me continue....Just write an MDB that activates on the DLQ. There isn't any modification to jbpm code. I don't think it could work the way you describe anyways. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4070775#4070775 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4070775

16 years, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss jBPM] - Re: Failure handling

by bill.burke＠jboss.com

i don't think we need to do it that way tom. Wouldn't this just work with no JBPM changes? | @MessageDriven(activationConfig= { | ActivationConfigProperty(propertyName="destinationType", propertyValue="javax.jms.Queue"), | ActivationConfigProperty(propertyName="messageSelector", propertyValue="jobId IS NOT NULL"), | ActivationConfigProperty(propertyName="destination", propertyValue="queue/DLQ")}) | public class DLQFailureHandler implements MessageListener | { | JbpmConfiguration jbpmConfiguration = null; | @Resource(name="JbpmCfgResource") String jbpmCfgResource = null; | | @PostConstruct | public void initJbpm() { | jbpmConfiguration = JbpmConfiguration.getInstance(jbpmCfgResource); | } | | public void onMessage(Message message) { | long jobId = 0; | try { | jobId = message.getLongProperty("jobId"); | } catch (JMSException ignored) { | // message selector confirms existence | } | | JbpmContext jbpmContext = jbpmConfiguration.createJbpmContext(); | try { | JobSession jobSession = jbpmContext.getJobSession(); | Job job = jobSession.loadJob(jobId); | if (!(job instanceof ExecuteNodeJob)) { | // do some other failure handling | jbpmContext.close(); | return; | } | ExecuteNodeJob executeNodeJob = (ExecuteNodeJob)job; | if (executeNodeJob.getNode().hasLeavingTransition("failure")) { | executeNodeJob.getProcessInstance().signal("failure"); | jobSession.deleteJob(job); | } | else { | // push to a different DLQ? | } | } finally { | jbpmContext.close(); | } | } | } | | View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4070774#4070774 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4070774

16 years, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss jBPM] - Re: how to delete process deifinitons

by amybasu

"kukeltje" wrote : wrong forum... use the user forum for this sorry, i posted it in another forum View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4070773#4070773 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4070773

16 years, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Re: Need a NamedObject SimpleMetaType

by scott.stark＠jboss.org

"adrian(a)jboss.org" wrote : The point I was trying to make before was that it probably be easier | for the mangement layer to deal with a map, so an alternative markup | might be to define on the collection: | | | | @MangementObject | | public class SecurityDeployment | | { | | // login-config.xml has many policies | | @ManagedProperty(managed=true map-id="name" id-qualifier="SecurityDomain") | | Collection<SecurityPolicy> getPolicies(); | | } | | | | Then the profile service when it does getProperty("policies") | would get a TableMetaValue of String(id/name)->ManagedObject | instead of having to iterate over an array of managed objects. | Ok, the reference to the login-config.xml is interesting now in that its not exposed as metadata available to the deployment layer. Its really handled outside of the associated security mbean as internal state of a custom jaas login configuration object in the jdk. It does in fact need to be associated with the jaas security domain mbean as sub-managed objects, and the id-qualifier needs to differentiate the SecurityDomain type further as there will be alternate SecurityDomain types (jaas, jaspi, ...). A little off topic, but that is why I was not following what the SecurityPolicy annotation was achieving. I'll try to have a revision of the management annotations by Monday to review. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4070729#4070729 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4070729

16 years, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Re: WriteThroughManagedPropertyImpl

by scott.stark＠jboss.org

"adrian(a)jboss.org" wrote : | Ok, but I think in general people will want to "mix and match" | the javabean stuff. e.g. flatten everything except this part | or like on other thread, this Collection is to be exposed as a Map. | | I don't see a problem with defining a global strategy on the @ManagementObject | but you also need to be able to override it on the @ManagementProperty Right now in fact its only supported on the @ManagementProperty. It does need to be definable globally to simplify. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4070722#4070722 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4070722

16 years, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss Web Services] - Re: JBossWS project structure has changed

by thomas.diesler＠jboss.com

I recommend you checkout the top level directory non-recursive | foo> svn co -N https://svn.jboss.org/repos/jbossws | foo> cd jbossws | jbossws> svn up stack | This will allow you to run 'svn status' at the top level, showing the change set in all subprojects View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4070716#4070716 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4070716

16 years, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Re: WriteThroughManagedPropertyImpl

by adrian＠jboss.org

"scott.stark(a)jboss.org" wrote : | Right, which is why I added the ability to describe what the Fields and ManagedProperty implementation are from the annotation. | Ok, but I think in general people will want to "mix and match" the javabean stuff. e.g. flatten everything except this part or like on other thread, this Collection is to be exposed as a Map. I don't see a problem with defining a global strategy on the @ManagementObject but you also need to be able to override it on the @ManagementProperty View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4070712#4070712 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4070712

16 years, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

jboss-dev-forums August 2007