[
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WFLY-10339?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin...
]
Paul Ferraro commented on WFLY-10339:
-------------------------------------
[~rsvoboda]
{quote}Will be old attributes deprecated and hidden in CLI for end user ?{quote}
The entire resource will be deprecated. I don't know of any way to hide these from
the CLI. But this is a good point - I don't think the CLI sufficiently presents
non-deprecated paths/attributes/operation as visually distinctive from non-deprecated
paths/attributes/operations. For example, if I use tab completion to suggest valid path
elements, I am presented with possible paths for both deprecated and non-deprecated
resources with no visual distinction.
I think this would be a very useful enhancement to the CLI, WDYT?
{quote}Is proposed change for the resources the only way to fix it or are there other ways
?{quote}
Even if galleon was not the original motivation behind this change, I would still strongly
encourage the migration to multiple resources per broadcast/discovery group type. The
current strategy of using a single resource with optional alternate attributes will
quickly break down as soon as we add a new broadcast/discovery type. In fact, we will
almost certainly introduce a new discovery group type that uses the discovery subsystem in
the near future.
{quote}About the naming of the attributes, I prefer to have jgroups or socket as suffix
and not as prefix.{quote}
While I can see the advantage of that - I can think of several counter-arguments:
* The introduction of a suffix-based naming scheme for resources providing the same
capability would be inconsistent with the naming scheme already used by other subsystems.
* Users already have the ability to query possible endpoints that provide a given
capability, thus they should never "be stuck a bit when finding proper
resources" - especially if we document the change adequately.
* Basing a naming scheme based on legacy user behavior is not necessarily the most
intuitive approach for new users
Broadcast/discovery-group resources have ambiguous requirement specs
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Key: WFLY-10339
URL:
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WFLY-10339
Project: WildFly
Issue Type: Bug
Components: JMS
Affects Versions: 12.0.0.Final
Reporter: Paul Ferraro
Assignee: Paul Ferraro
Currently, the broadcast/discovery-group resources have messy requirement specs, as the
capabilities that they require are dependent whether or not the jgroups-cluster attribute
is defined.
I suggest splitting these resources into 2:
{code}/subsystem=messaging-activemq/server=*/jgroups-broadcast-group=*{code}
{code}/subsystem=messaging-activemq/server=*/jgroups-discovery-group=*{code}
which requires clustering capabilities
and
{code}/subsystem=messaging-activemq/server=*/socket-broadcast-group=*{code}
{code}/subsystem=messaging-activemq/server=*/socket-discovery-group=*{code}
which requires a socket-binding capability.
This results in clearer requirement specs - which helps simplify the introspection of
this subsystem for provisioning purposes.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.5.0#75005)