> David Jencks wrote: > > > I'm not entirely sure I understand how you are using all the terms > > here, so hopefully you'll be able to understand at least part of what I > > write:-) > > > > I'm assuming by "service" you mean "a bunch of mbeans". > > To which Jacek Laskowski responded: > > Exactly. The term "service" is taken from the names of the mbeans and > files currently available in Geronimo. I don't therefore understand why > people name the bunch of mbeans - services - if they're not so? How > would you like to see it named? "A bunch of mbeans" is quite a long name :-)
In the books and in the documentation for JMX stuff we call them "manageable resources". I think the term "service" is extremely clich�--overused, confusing and so abstract it is almost without meaning. We might as well call them "things" as "services". Is there a way we could adopt the term manageable resources or some abbreviation, (although, on second thought, we *could* start calling them "BoMBs", which would nicely follow David's description "Bunch of MBeans") And then you drop the BoMBs into the deployment directory, and ... : P -- N. Alex Rupp ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
