Re: [wildfly-dev] Is JMX Needed in Core?

Brian Stansberry wrote: > On 7/9/14, 1:59 PM, Stuart Douglas wrote: >> The problem with that is that if you take it to its fullest extent you >> end up with one subsystem per repo, which is not something we want. >> >> I am not sure where the best place for it is, even if it stays in core >> it should be possible for the tooling to exclude it, same with logging. >> >> Otherwise I think the place for it to live would be the web distro, as I >> think that people will definitely want to be able to use JMX to manage >> that. >> > > So the web build is becoming the spot where foundational stuff like this > and Elytron come in? The core is uber-minimal for the folks who really > want that, and then web has these things that lots and lots of folks > will want. > > In the odd case where folks want this foundational stuff but not > undertow etc, they can just depend on the web build and exclude > undertow. Real corner case. And folks who don't want the foundational > stuff exclude it. > > I can see that working out pretty well. > > Does logging belong in web then then? Still seems like something that > even the uber-minimalists would want. I ask because it bugs me that we > have two meanings now for "core" -- the old "core" notion that was the > true core with zero subsystems, and now this new wildfly-core dist, > which has subsystems. I'm really not sure. TBH from a practical sense I don't think it makes any real difference, its more of an idealogical thing. I guess if we look at web as being 'all the stuff that people will probably need' then it makes sense that logging, jmx and deployment-scanner live there instead of core.