[jboss-dev] Re: ServiceBindingManager status?

[Dimitris Andreadis]

It's a hack but it looks good to me. It's not far from the concept of slitting the web 
deployer, although that will be implemented differently.

Scott what do you think?

Brian Stansberry wrote:
> I went ahead and experimented with the wrapper idea, in case you guys 
> want it.  Quite simple and seems to work fine.  SBM works for the 
> webserver connectors with it in place.  Will run some parts of testsuite 
> tonight.  With it you can also move the CachedConnectionManager back 
> into deploy. If you're curious, a patch is attached.  Patch shows that 
> it's quite clean to divide the runtime element of TomcatDeployer from 
> the deployer element.
> 
> Admittedly, it's a hack.
> 
> If we want SBM to work, I will need to convert some clustering pojo 
> services back to JMX services.  That shouldn't be a big deal; involves 
> carving them out of cluster-beans.xml and putting them in a service.xml. 
>  The core HAPartition stuff would remain as pojos in cluster-beans.xml.
> 
> The attached patch doesn't deal with the build, i.e. getting the 
> jboss-web-service.xml file into deploy.
> 
> Dimitris Andreadis wrote:
>> I believe SBM is enabled in the ServiceController.
>>
>> Nevertheless my point is, we shouldn't retire things expected to work 
>> from 4.x until we have working alternatives. Same goes for 'farming'.
>>
>> Scott M Stark wrote:
>>> I don't thinks its important. Beyond the wrapper you would still need to
>>> enable the sbm in the ServiceController.
>>>
>>> Brian Stansberry wrote:
>>>> That sounds like my #2. Or are you saying load the whole unrefactored
>>>> thing from the deployers dir, but via a -service.xml? Possible but 
>>>> don't
>>>> know if that would cause issues.
>>>>
>>>> I can spend a couple hours today/tomorrow experimenting with the 
>>>> wrapper
>>>> concept, and maybe simply deploying via service.xml. But I don't 
>>>> want to
>>>> waste effort unless there's agreement that getting SBM to work for 
>>>> Beta4
>>>> is an important goal.  And if there's consensus (e.g. from Remy) that
>>>> whatever I'm trying is an acceptable temporary measure if it works.
>>>>
>>>
>