Excellent; thanks Adrian.
I added a sentence to the JBJMX project description pointing to JBMX.
Perhaps we should change the name of it in JIRA as well from "JBoss JMX"
to something that warns people of like "Legacy JBoss JMX (Closed)". A
couple days ago I was poking around trying to investigate history and
ended up in the wrong project.
On 01/14/2010 04:33 AM, Adrian Brock wrote:
I changed trunk to use the external JBossMX last February.
There was a release of Beta2 in March which was mainly
a tidyup release.
Anil's fix was in May. but since he hasn't created a JBMX jira for
his fix is doesn't appear on that project's roadmap.
https://jira.jboss.org/jira/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&pid...
I'll do a Beta3 release for that.
The mc-jmx-int and deployers-jmx stuff was only in the 2.2.x branches
of the MC projects. Now that you've upgraded trunk to those versions it
should be a lot easier to use the external versions.
ejb3 was already using it.
I'll test it, and change trunk to use them. Then we can remove the
duplicate code from system-jmx.
The only additional issue is whether we still want to use the JBossMX
mbeanserver now that I have a way to use the JDK's MBeanServer.
https://jira.jboss.org/jira/browse/JBMX-11
We could keep the choice, since its just a case of
changing the MBeanServerBuilder system property.
We still need the j2se and mbeans stuff for the legacy XMBean support.
On Wed, 2010-01-13 at 11:34 +0100, Ales Justin wrote:
>> Are we going to do a new release of the org.jboss.mx artifacts (AS is
>> currently using 6.0.0.Beta1)?
>
> Does this mean we're using our externalized JBossMX?
> Afaik, we're not yet ready to switch AS to use externalized version.
> *
>
http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/jboss-development/2009-December/015142.html
>
> Adrian?
> _______________________________________________
> jboss-development mailing list
> jboss-development(a)lists.jboss.org
>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-development
--
Brian Stansberry
Lead, AS Clustering
JBoss by Red Hat