I agree with Gareth,I am not quite sure of why JMX would not be used, or would be replaced at some other time.
Regards, Weston On Monday 11 August 2003 09:28 am, Gareth Bryan wrote: > >On Mon, 11 Aug 2003 04:40:40 -0400, "Noel J. Bergman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > said: > > > > Jason Dillon wrote: > > > we will eventually want to replace the JMX bus with a more > > > robust component system. > > > > The sense I am getting from the list is that there is a decent sized base > > of > > people who agree with you, and who see JMX as an interface TO a component > > system, not AS the component system. > > I get that sense aswell, although personally, I haven't spoken up about > it before now because I wanted to take a look at the seed code. My > initial opinion is that I'd like to see some hard evidence for the > drawbacks for using JMX, putting it another way: I'm a +1 for JMX at the > moment. > > Perhaps there are others like me who have not spoken up about this until > first look at the code? > > Just a thought. > > Regards, > > Gareth > -- > Gareth Bryan > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
