pushed a first version in api, package api.jmx.

hope it will be easier now to go forward and discuss about it

Romain Manni-Bucau
Twitter: @rmannibucau
Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau



2012/12/16 Gerhard Petracek <[email protected]>:
> +1
> (also +1 for using @ApplicationScoped)
>
> regards,
> gerhard
>
>
>
> 2012/12/16 Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]>
>
>> ok
>>
>> starting work now
>>
>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> Twitter: @rmannibucau
>> Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
>> LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
>> Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
>>
>>
>>
>> 2012/12/16 Mark Struberg <[email protected]>:
>> > I'd say we allow all NormalScoped beans to be MBean. @ApplicationScoped
>> makes by far the most sense, but I could think about e.g. a @ClusterScoped,
>> etc....
>> >
>> > Does @Dependent make any sense? Hmm maybe! In that case I'd suggest to
>> not use the BeanProvider but manually via CreationalContext, etc and after
>> you got all the info you throw the bean away immediately again? Not sure if
>> we should go that way, but it would be rather easy to add this later.
>> >
>> > So I suggest to initially place no restriction on the bean type and we
>> will discuss @Dependent scoped beans while reviewing your code.
>> >
>> > Sounds ok to you?
>> >
>> > LieGrue,
>> > strub
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ----- Original Message -----
>> >> From: Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]>
>> >> To: [email protected]
>> >> Cc: Mark Struberg <[email protected]>
>> >> Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2012 2:47 PM
>> >> Subject: Re: MBeans extension?
>> >>
>> >> Ok guys,
>> >>
>> >> will have some time to try to comit it
>> >>
>> >> the last question i have is: what about @Dependent beans? relying on
>> >> BeanProvider means it is not supported. We could saying we create it
>> >> lazily and destroy them with beforeshutdown (kind of manual
>> >> @ApplicationScoped but consistent with MBean idea)
>> >>
>> >> wdyt?
>> >>
>> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >> Twitter: @rmannibucau
>> >> Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
>> >> LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
>> >> Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> 2012/12/10 Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]>:
>> >>>  Hey guys,
>> >>>
>> >>>  what's next about it?
>> >>>
>> >>>  do i fork ds on github then add it (where? core?)?
>> >>>
>> >>>  or do we want to discuss about it before?
>> >>>
>> >>>  Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >>>  Twitter: @rmannibucau
>> >>>  Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
>> >>>  LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
>> >>>  Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>  2012/11/29 Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]>:
>> >>>>  Right,
>> >>>>
>> >>>>  in OpenEJB i imported this API from the postponed JSR then added it
>> in
>> >>>>  a proprietary package too since it was/seems abandonned
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>  Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >>>>  Twitter: @rmannibucau
>> >>>>  Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
>> >>>>  LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
>> >>>>  Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>  2012/11/29 Pete Muir <[email protected]>:
>> >>>>>  This is a very nice feature to add IMO :-) We have done something
>> >> very similar as an example for JBoss as well.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>  Looks like this modelled after the abandoned JSR-255 annotations?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>  On 28 Nov 2012, at 21:49, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>>  yep
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>  from a dependency point of view it can be in core i think (and
>> >>>>>>  annotations in api)
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>  can be a separated module too but think it is not justified
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>  the issue i currently have is how to get the cdi bean from the
>> >> MBean.
>> >>>>>>  I used BeanProvider (ignoring Qualifiers for a first version)
>> >> but it
>> >>>>>>  is not the best way if some "destroy/release" should
>> >> be done. Not sure
>> >>>>>>  we have this issue elsewhere
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>  What i wanted to avoid is to add a MBean specific qualifier and
>> >> add
>> >>>>>>  another bean completely managed (to use later @Inject @DSMBean
>> >> MyMBean
>> >>>>>>  mbean;)
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>  Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >>>>>>  Twitter: @rmannibucau
>> >>>>>>  Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
>> >>>>>>  LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
>> >>>>>>  Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>  2012/11/28 Mark Struberg <[email protected]>:
>> >>>>>>>  yea, looks good. Not sure in which module it fits though.
>> >> But certainly a good start for a discussion.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>  LieGrue,
>> >>>>>>>  strub
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>  ----- Original Message -----
>> >>>>>>>>  From: Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]>
>> >>>>>>>>  To: [email protected]
>> >>>>>>>>  Cc:
>> >>>>>>>>  Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 8:58 PM
>> >>>>>>>>  Subject: MBeans extension?
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>  Hi guys,
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>  just pushed on guithub a poc to ease MBean (JMX ones)
>> >> usage with CDI.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>  Here are the sources:
>> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau/cdi-mbean
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>  do you think we can/should integrate it in DS?
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>  Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >>>>>>>>  Twitter: @rmannibucau
>> >>>>>>>>  Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
>> >>>>>>>>  LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
>> >>>>>>>>  Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>
>>

Reply via email to