[wildfly-dev] Is JMX Needed in Core?

[Fernando Nasser]

Shouldn't it be like an onion?

A more bare core.  A Core with monitoring capabilities.  And so on.


On 2014-07-09, 2:27 PM, Brian Stansberry wrote:
> My earlier reply on this thread was in the branch focused on the
> technical detail of how the dependency arises. Which should be fixed;
> sounds like that's happening.
>
> On the broader question of where stuff belongs, JMX is an interesting
> case. Lots of users will want JMX. A number of subsystems have optional
> dependencies on it, including some like jgroups and infinispan that may
> end up being part of their own dist, separate from the full dist.
>
> So what's the plan for catering to these needs? Ship it in the full dist
> and those who want it depend on the full dist but configure the
> provisioning tool to only grab the JMX modules? Make it a micro-dist?
> Maybe a mini-dist packaged with some others? JMX, system-jmx, pojo as
> the "deploy your own services" dist? (I don't like that last one, just
> brainstorming...)
>
> On 7/9/14, 5:47 AM, Darran Lofthouse wrote:
>> Working with the split repo just questioning if JMX is really needed in
>> core?
>>
>> Whilst most distributions would include it I am not convinced it is a
>> subsystem all must have.
>>
> Manageable logging isn't either. Lots of people used logging.properties
> for a long time.
>
> Note I'm not advocating removing logging from core; I'm just saying that
> no subsystem has to be in core if that's the criteria.
>
>> Regards,
>> Darran Lofthouse.
>> _______________________________________________
>> wildfly-dev mailing list
>> wildfly-dev at lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/wildfly-dev
>>
>