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

[Design of POJO Server] - Re: Integrating aop-mc-int bean metadata with AS5

by kabir.khan＠jboss.com

My last comment is probably a bit confused. The SchemaResolverDeployer needs namespaces to be set otherwise it falls over, so I think having the namespace should be a hard requirement View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4152625#4152625 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4152625

17 years, 10 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of POJO Server] - Re: Integrating aop-mc-int bean metadata with AS5

by kabir.khan＠jboss.com

Also to be picked up by the new deployers, the -aop.xml files will need to be updated to include the namespace: | <aop xmlns="urn:jboss:aop-beans:1.0"> | Should this be a hard requirement for AS5? I could keep the old AspectDeployer as well I guess, but it will be a PITA to maintain the two... View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4152623#4152623 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4152623

17 years, 10 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of POJO Server] - Integrating aop-mc-int bean metadata with AS5

by kabir.khan＠jboss.com

I am trying to rewrite the aspect deployers to use the beanmetadata I created in the aop-mc-int project. I have created a SchemaResolverDeployer that parses an AOPDeployment from an -aop.xml file. I need to create something that translates the aop annotations to the same. Since AOPDeployment is a subclass of AbstractKernelDeployment it gets deployed by the BeanMetaDataDeployer, and this seems to work fine for the very basic example I am playing with. So far so good, but in the case of scoped aop, we need to obtain the correct manager to use, and to update that in the entries of all the metadata. What is the best way to do that? I need a PostClassLoader deployer, but it seems hacky to make that look for all the beans that have any of the aop-mc stuff as their classes and then to reset the manager-bean properties on those? Also, we can deploy aop stuff as part of other deployments as well, e.g. -beans.xml, which will result in an AbstractKernelDeployment being attached to the deployment, but do we really want to inspect those as well? There might also be other deployments that use aop type stuff? View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4152620#4152620 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4152620

17 years, 10 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss ESB] - Re: JCRMessageStoreImpl store only message body?

by mark.little＠jboss.com

No, I'm just saying that we need to be careful. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4152612#4152612 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4152612

17 years, 10 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Re: Composite Map key and weak reference

by alesj

"bstansberry(a)jboss.com" wrote : | | | public class Key | | { | | private static final ReferenceQueue refQueue = new ReferenceQueue(); | | | | private final KeyRef keyRef; | | private final WeakReference<Annotation>[] annotations; | | | | public Key(Class clazz, Annotation[] annotations) | | { | | this.keyRef = new KeyRef(this, clazz, refQueue); | | this.annotations = new WeakReference[annotations.length]; | | for (int j = 0; j < annotations.length; j++) | | { | | this.annotations[j]= new WeakReference<Annotation>(annotations[j]); | | } | | } | | Do I really need these annotations to be wrapped in weak refs? Wouldn't they get immediately gced? Or if I just leave them strong, my whole Key instance will be gc candidate the moment I nullify it in here | while ((ref = refQueue.poll()) != null) | { | ((KeyRef) ref).key = null; | } | since nothing else now has a strongly ref on it. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4152608#4152608 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4152608

17 years, 10 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of POJO Server] - Re: migrating TransactionManager and Invokers to POJO

by jhalliday

OK, so I now have a POJO version of both the JTA and JTS TransactionManager. The next trick will be actually getting it into the app server. I guess I need to do a CR level JBossTS release, since that's where the AS is headed. Once that's published, JBossAS trunk can be changed to consume it. I'd also like to include support for the new crash recovery SPI though, which will mean first doing a new jboss-integration release and putting that into the AS, so that the JBossTS build can use it. Dimitris, do you have any problem with us doing these updates before AS 5.0 CR1, or do you want to wait until after? View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4152607#4152607 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4152607

17 years, 10 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss ESB] - Re: Support marshaling or unmarshaling the soap message us

by jim.ma

"maeste" wrote : My doubts is about how the configuration can become pain if you would expose objects more and more complex than a class containing a string. Yes. That's correct. We need to add some complex annotation configuration file(jaxb annotation introduction) for a complex type. If jbossws native only supports the jaxb databinding , that's the only option. I will look at the jbossws native and find out if it has its own databinding to handle the pojo class(class without annotation). "maeste" wrote : | The other question is: are you thinking only at a marshal/unmarshal feature, or are you planning also some logical mappings between what is exposed as ws and internal data? Are you asking if I plan use OGNL framework or something to map the soap message to internal ESB message and payload conversion ? If the marshal/unmarshal feature can handle all the cases, I'd prefer to add marshal/unmarshal feature. It's straightforward. What do you think? View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4152586#4152586 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4152586

17 years, 10 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss jBPM] - Re: bug triage...

by tom.baeyens＠jboss.com

thanks ronals. Koen, can you have a look at those ? View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4152573#4152573 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4152573

17 years, 10 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of EJB 3.0] - Re: EJBTHREE-1062 and metadata

by emuckenhuber

Yup i thought of doing the same to fix the tests. But shouldn't metadata validate and fail when parsing the example above? Referring to the RemoteProcessor which does smth like this: | // Although this is not explicitly allowed by the spec, we accept it | // EJB 3 4.6.7 | if(EJBObject.class.isAssignableFrom(businessInterface)) | { | if(metaData.getRemote() != null) | throw new IllegalArgumentException("2.1 bean " + metaData.getEjbName() + " already has a remote interface " + metaData.getRemote() + ", can't add " + businessInterface.getName()); | metaData.setRemote(businessInterface.getName()); | } | else | { | metaData.getBusinessRemotes().add(businessInterface.getName()); | } | That means if you have: | @Stateful(name="AnotherName") | @Remote(MyStateful.class) | @RemoteHome(MyStatefulHome.class) | public class MyStatefulBean | { | ... | } | | public interface MyStatefulHome extends EJBHome | { | public MyStateful create(String x); | } | | public interface MyStateful extends EJBObject | { | | } | Which would be ok as the return type of the RemoteHome extends EJBObject - it would just set MyStateful as Remote interface - and @Remote will be more or less ignored. Is that ok / the expected behaviour? View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4152568#4152568 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4152568

17 years, 10 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of Messaging on JBoss (Messaging/JBoss)] - Re: State of our failing tests

by timfox

"ataylor" wrote : | that'll be done some time day. that gives me about 36 hours if my calcs are correct! LOL. Yeah, I find these standard 24 hours days just too constricting, never enough time to get anything done :) View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4152557#4152557 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4152557

17 years, 10 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 May 2008