<div dir="ltr">Sounds good to me.<div><br></div><div>Stuart</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 3:39 PM, David M. Lloyd <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:david.lloyd@redhat.com" target="_blank">david.lloyd@redhat.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">I think we need to look into a small redesign of how we handle<br>
java:comp, java:module, and java:app. The reasoning comes in three parts:<br>
<br>
* Various specs require that certain names be bound globally across all<br>
of java:comp.<br>
* Various other specs implicitly expect to be able to query these<br>
globally bound names even if there is no actual component context.<br>
* Duplicating these bindings uses more resources than are necessary.<br>
<br>
Therefore I think we need to make a small change - we should have a<br>
"global" version of the three context-specific namespaces that act as a<br>
sort of fallback if there's no (component|module|app)-specific name<br>
bound at a location. This allows us to do a few things:<br>
<br>
* Satisfy the spec issues<br>
* Reduce resource overhead<br>
* Allow globally-configured things in the management config to bind to<br>
component/module/app-specific namespaces<br>
<br>
Thoughts?<br>
<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888">--<br>
- DML<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
wildfly-dev mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:wildfly-dev@lists.jboss.org">wildfly-dev@lists.jboss.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/wildfly-dev" target="_blank">https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/wildfly-dev</a><br>
</font></span></blockquote></div><br></div>