Jeremy, If I think of drools as an outside component JCA makes more sense.
But if I think of it as something that might manage Geronimo itself, the MBeans approach seems to make more sense to me. I like the idea of an MBeans approach since this would mean Jules' approach (drool managing Geronimo) would be easier to realize. Rules rock! Saad Rehmani. -----Original Message----- From: Jeremy Boynes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2003 12:37 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: JSR94 I would suggest JCA rather than a pure MBean - if there is already some JCA support in drools it may be easier and then the solution would not be Geronimo specific. -- Jeremy > -----Original Message----- > From: Chris Perrin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2003 8:50 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: JSR94 > > > OK, I'll see what I can do about setting drools up as an MBean. Nothing > like sticking my head in a noose. :) > > Chris > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "James Strachan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2003 10:43 AM > Subject: Re: JSR94 > > > > > > On Thursday, October 30, 2003, at 04:32 pm, Chris Perrin wrote: > > > > > Sorry to be obtuse, but does that mean: > > > > > > a) Drools already does this or > > > > Yes. AFAIK drools already is JSR 94 compliant and has the basics of a > > JCA connector implementation (which may need some work). > > > > > > > b) It might be interesting to enable drools to run with Geronimo? > > > > Or to say that another way, we should try embedding drools into > > Geronimo, either as MBeans or as a JCA connector. I can imagine there's > > some work required to cleanly integrate the two - if you fancy diving > > in and helping. Then we could start using rules to manage Geronimo > > itself which would be really cool. > > > > James > > ------- > > http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/ > > > >
