Aaron Mulder wrote:
I disagree -- I think it's important to have a common management interface (currently, for example, NetworkConnector), and having the same properties called something different in every networkable GBean totally defeats that.
I agree a common management interface is desirable. Unfortunately the containers we are integrating appear to have little in common. From what I hear Jeff saying, apparently simple concepts like "host" differ.
What this means is that we will need substantial extensions to the "common" interface to deal with these container specific concepts; the lowest common denominator is proving to be too low.
This does mean more work for us: alternative deployment infrastructure, alternative management APIs, multiple management portlets, and so on. However, it provides a simple and more intuitive interface for the user so should be done.
-- Jeremy
