March 2008 - jboss-dev-forums - Jboss List Archives

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Re: Splitting the rest of MC

by adrian＠jboss.org

Give me chance to finish it then I'll explain it in due course. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4135376#4135376 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4135376

18 years, 1 month

1
0
0 / 0

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Re: JBoss Managed as an external project

by mark.spritzler

Adrian, sorry for the stupid question, But are the old maven managed and metatype artifact names now combined into jboss-man-aggregator? We had | <dependency> | <groupId>org.jboss.man</groupId> | <artifactId>jboss-managed</artifactId> | <version>${microcontainer.version}</version> | <scope>provided</scope> | </dependency> | | <dependency> | <groupId>org.jboss.man</groupId> | <artifactId>jboss-metatype</artifactId> | <version>${microcontainer.version}</version> | <scope>provided</scope> | </dependency> | in our pom for dependencies, and I am updating it. Thanks Mark View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4135374#4135374 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4135374

18 years, 1 month

1
0
0 / 0

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Re: Splitting the rest of MC

by alesj

"alesj" wrote : | OK, osgi-int is an obvious one, I'll move it out asap. | http://anonsvn.jboss.org/repos/jbossas/projects/jboss-osgi/ :-) View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4135373#4135373 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4135373

18 years, 1 month

1
0
0 / 0

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Re: Splitting the rest of MC

by alesj

Aha, just saw this: - http://anonsvn.jboss.org/repos/jbossas/projects/reliance/ View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4135370#4135370 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4135370

18 years, 1 month

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of EJB 3.0] - Re: Move Interceptors and Tests back into AS5 Workspace

by ALRubinger

"anil.saldhana(a)jboss.com" wrote : What you need when you get cranky is a nice spanking. ;) Please move this to "Design of Inappropriate Advances in the Workplace". "anil.saldhana(a)jboss.com" wrote : The issue is the effort in isolating the functionality in bits that need to be unit tested. You have got to start sometime in getting there. :) So I think we're of the same views there. You bring up some great points, I think we just need to figure our migration path to this type of setup, and slowly introduce this externalization into our workflow. S, ALR View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4135369#4135369 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4135369

18 years, 1 month

1
0
0 / 0

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Splitting the rest of MC

by alesj

After all these: - http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&t=131537 - http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&t=131494 - http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&t=131166 - http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&t=131104 And it looks like Deployers are also already out. What should we do with the rest? - dependency - kernel - docs - aop-mc-int - spring-int - guice-int - reliance - osgi-int OK, osgi-int is an obvious one, I'll move it out asap. Should we do an mc-int with aop-mc, spring, guice, reliance? And just keep dependency, kernel and docs as they are? But I would give them different 'group' name. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4135367#4135367 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4135367

18 years, 1 month

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss ESB] - Re: Updates to the Rules Service

by mark.little＠jboss.com

The BRMS is being supported now (early adopters), but will definitely be supported in the 4.3 release of the SOA Platform. Since that's a few months down the line, it should give us enough time to fully QA it. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4135362#4135362 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4135362

18 years, 1 month

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss ESB] - Re: Updates to the Rules Service

by jeffdelong

Support of the BRMS console per se is not a feature of the Rule Service. The Rule Service (as I have extended it), supports the RuleAgentAPI. This allows a rule package to be pulled from either the BRMS (via URL) or a file system. Support for the BRMS (as in support as part of the subscription), is a related issue and has concerns related to the BRMS quality / stability as Kurt points out. It may be that the next release of the SOA Platform rule service provides RuleAgentAPI support without BRMS support. Also to add to Kurt's comments, the proposed Rule Service would also support Decision Tables. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4135361#4135361 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4135361

18 years, 1 month

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of EJB 3.0] - Re: webservices ejb3 api usage

by heiko.braun＠jboss.com

OK, as I said before I am looking at areas that require decoupling: a) Meta data retrieval b) Invocation handling For retrieving web service relevant meta data from a ejb3 deployment, I think the contract would cover certain Container methods and annotations representing web service meta data: | Container { | | [...] | | String getEjbName(); | String getBeanClassName(); | <T> T getAnnotation(Class<T>); | } | That's basically already given, I would just need supply the annotations and their implementation. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4135360#4135360 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4135360

18 years, 1 month

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss ESB] - Re: Updates to the Rules Service

by kurt.stam＠jboss.com

The major changes are incorporation of the jbrms console, and allowing stateful use of a Rules Based Service. It be great to get both in, but I do think we may need some good testing of the console (the one that comes with 4.0.3 gives me permgen issues after a few hours of simply being deployed). --Kurt View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4135355#4135355 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4135355

18 years, 1 month

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 March 2008