On 12/4/2013 9:43 AM, Brian Stansberry wrote:
OTOH I think using server-side *system properties* to store client
values has a really bad smell.
I agree it seems to smell but I can't figure out
exactly why. The
alternative would be to create a second group of properties called
"client properties" or "cli properties".
A bit more below...
On 12/4/13 8:26 AM, Alexey Loubyansky wrote:
> On 12/04/2013 03:15 PM, ssilvert(a)redhat.com wrote:
>> On 12/4/2013 7:41 AM, Alexey Loubyansky wrote:
>>> I haven't thought about that scope. But anyway, if it proves useful
>>> it's doable.
>> The use case I had in mind was for if I want to share a script that runs
>> against servers or domain controllers on the network. As it is, I would
>> have to tell the other person how to set all their variables. Giving
>> the other person my .jbossclirc file is not a good idea because it also
>> contains variable values that only pertain to my local environment.
> Variables can also be set in the beginning of a script. Although, I can
> see advantages of keeping them out and simply relying on certain
> variables in a script.
>> It's the same concept as Maven's settings.xml file for local properties
>> vs. the "shared" properties set in pom.xml.
>> It might be that all you need is to simply allow a variable to refer to
>> system properties on the server. That would be your shared variable.
>> The $prod_db example you gave earlier would be a good candidate for a
>> shared variable. So someone sets the property with:
>> Then anyone could use the $prod_db variable against that server no
>> matter where the command runs from.
> That is indeed useful. BTW, don't we have aliases in the management
> model that could also be used for this?
Management model aliases are static. They are used to provide backwards
compatibility when we rename a resource or attribute.
> wildfly-dev mailing list