-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Alex,
I agree that JMX is the common model, but JMX , even JSR-77 is still pretty generic. The coarse grained object model is fine, but there is a lot of glue needed, which could be factored out. This would at least be true for sharing between applications of a kind, i.e. a NetBeans and an Eclipse plug-in. [ ressources ] E.g. nice and shiny icons (could also be shared with a webapp [metadata] Descriptions on how to map the jmx beans to j2ee managed objects, e.g. what attributes form children of the hierarchy [jmx/jsr77-utitlies] - - Event/Notifications in a stripped down, less generic version - - common code for accessing jmx/jsr77 attributes and caching them - - extracting state - - translating generic responses to concrete Java objects - - utitlity code to establish the jmx connections - - utiltity code to invoke jmx/jsr77 operations - - unification of exception handling. I don't think anybody needs a dozen exception types thrown by jmx [logging] and likely more. Cheers, Mariano On Friday 21 November 2003 21:12, n. alex rupp wrote: > Al, we actually do share the same model--JMX : ) > > It's the custom addons to JMX to prettify the output that > might not transfer too well between apps ; ) > -- > N. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE/vnidSraqt+SsFIMRAn1lAJ9SgN31Wk+3h5gFqzfEfyMsO00HUQCdGuMs FFdZDLqeri6s+itrfwSMO4k= =wV2J -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
