[Hawkular-dev] attribute names have a new rule in WF9

[Thomas Heute]

Tomas just answered on #wildfly:

<theute> BTW mazz found either an issue or a deliberate change in WF9. subsystem attributes names used to accept things like "foo.bar" now it chokes on the "."
<theute> ctomc, do you know who we can annoy to make sure that this is expected and we need to change or if that's a bug and going to change back
<ctomc> theute i would be the one that you would need to annoy
<ctomc> but all i can tell you that this is done on purpose
<ctomc> "." is special charachers
<ctomc> that cannot be part of attribute name
<theute> :-/
<ctomc> as it is used for "enhaced syntax" resolving in cli/mgmt tools
<theute> and "-" is safe ?
<ctomc> yes
<ctomc> https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WFCORE-460
<jbossbot> jira [WFCORE-460] Extended sytnax for read/write-attribute [Resolved (Done) Sub-task, Major, Tomaz Cerar] https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WFCORE-460
<ctomc> we added support for some neat stuff
<ctomc> https://gist.github.com/ctomc/91055a6f4e7502dcd130
<ctomc> on top of my head, forbiden chars are .[]() and few more

Thomas

On 06/16/2015 03:32 PM, John Mazzitelli wrote:
> These aren't FQDN java names - these are sysprop names.  They are like this because these are actually used to "pass through" to the active mq broker configuration file. I could name them something simpler, but the idea was you can definitely tell which ones were sysprops to be passed through (and in the future we are going to need more of these to further configure the bus broker).
>
> This worked in 8.2. They didn't care what our names are of the attributes. Something broke in 9.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> > On 15 Jun 2015, at 23:05, Jay Shaughnessy wrote:
> >
> >> Sounds like a pretty bad regression.  They should likely fix it.
> >> Although we may want also want to make a change to '-' instead of
> >> waiting for a fix.  Bad for sysprop names, though...
> >
> > How exactly does that impact us?
> > Attribute names can't be FQDN, that I understand.
> > But why do we want them as FQDN in the first place?
> > I see one occurence in standalone.xml
> >
> > <connector org.hawkular.bus.broker.connector.name="openwire"
> >      org.hawkular.bus.broker.connector.protocol="tcp"
> >      socket-binding="org.hawkular.bus.broker"/>
> >
> > Can't that just be "protocol" ?
> >
> > If WildFly forces a FQDN here for the protocol, then they need to
> > support it. Otherwise we can change our side.
> >
> > Sysprops are in the form
> >
> > <property name="bla" value="bla" />
> >
> > and seem not affected
> >
> >     Heiko
> > _______________________________________________
> > hawkular-dev mailing list
> > hawkular-dev at lists.jboss.org
> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hawkular-dev
> >
> _______________________________________________
> hawkular-dev mailing list
> hawkular-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hawkular-dev
>