Re: [wildfly-dev] RA subsystem: renaming <admin-object> "pool-name" attribute to "name"

Yes, that's what I believe should be done. Adding also Tomasz and Tom :). I'm yet to asses the impact on documentation, by my feeling from my initial investigation was that I didn't found very many documents dealing with this.

Am I correct in thinking that if the new parser is able to parse the old config version, no other migration work is needed?

Tomas On 19/07/18 22:38, Brian Stansberry wrote: > So basically the issue here is that the xml attribute should be called > 'name' instead of 'pool-name'? > > Sounds like a minor Enhancement not a major Bug. If there's much in the > way of docs out there that use pool-name then the cost of changing it > (wrong docs) may outweigh any benefit. > > On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 9:24 AM, Tomas Hofman <thofman(a)redhat.com > <mailto:thofman@redhat.com>> wrote: > > The <admin-object> and <connection-definition> elements in resource > adapters > subsystem have "pool-name" attribute that looks like it isn't used for > anything, which is misleading for users. > > It looks that "pool-name" attribute was intended for functionality > that wasn't > implemented. The attributes are only present in XML, and do not exist > in > management model. > > During resource creation the values are passed into service value > objects > (ModifiableAdminObject, ModifiableConnDef), but #getPoolName() > methods are not > called from anywhere. > > The attributes can't be simply removed because their values are used > for > resource addressing, e.g. > > /subsystem=resource-adapters/.../admin-objects=test-a-o:add(...) > > will produce > > <admin-object ... pool-name="test-a-o"/> > > so some "name" attribute is still needed. > > Unless you think that this is not worth having new schema version (or > the > intended functionality that requires "pool-name" attrs is planned to > be > implemented), I would create new XSD schema version with "pool-name" > renamed to > "name" and update the parser. I suppose the new XSD version should be > 6.0, > rather than 5.1, no matter how small the change. > > Also, AFAIK this change couldn't be backported to released product > streams. > > The issue where this was raised is > https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JBEAP-15023 > <https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JBEAP-15023> > > -- Tomas Hofman > Software Engineer, JBoss SET > Red Hat > _______________________________________________ > wildfly-dev mailing list > wildfly-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:wildfly-dev@lists.jboss.org> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/wildfly-dev > <https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/wildfly-dev> > > > > > -- > Brian Stansberry > Manager, Senior Principal Software Engineer > Red Hat > -- Tomas Hofman Software Engineer, JBoss SET Red Hat