> Interesting, please do describe the "integration" you have done
> as we might
> want to document it for folks needing that integration. We might want to
> start it as a JMX mbean also so you would just say "I want the Voyager
> stuff" and we would get it going for you (just like we do with Tomcat).
Basically what I did was create a VoyagerServer mbean that extends from
ServiceMBeanSupport and WHAM-O Voyager can be started with jboss' JMX
framework. VoyagerServer starts a directory server for Voyager and starts
up their EJB container. Now we can use your logging facilities and the
framework for initializing our other services. The next step is to split
the directory server and container into 2 separate mbeans to allow greater
flexibility but there are a couple Voyager issues that need to be figured
out. Currently I am also trying to port a Scheduler and Email Queue to the
JMX framework so we can initialize everything from one spot. (I'll share if
it works ;-)
What are the licensing issues with distributing open source code that wraps
commercial code? Is Thought, Inc. giving you a special license to integrate
CocoBase? I have also been thinking about Toplink integration with jboss
but I think this might be a little out of my league ;-)
>
> Note that we have EXACTLY the same problem with Tomcat, namely that the
> visibility of the class loaders is not unified. Of course we need to pass
> the class loaders around. Also be careful that many of our interfaces are
> build and passed at runtime so that the visibility on the class definition
> is passed around at runtime in a "lean and mean" fashion... in clear the
> class loader you pass will not contain the visibility on the
> deployed beans.
>
I was lucky, I just passed the current one to voyager and it took care of
the rest.
-rick
__________________________________________________________
Rick Gibbs
Chief Technology Officer turbo charge your career
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://careers.earthcars.com
