Rickard �berg wrote:
R�> Hey
R�> I want feedback on two issues brought up yesterday: , and use of java:
R�> namespace
R�> 1. Configuration files
R�> Currently it is possible to have several jBoss configurations by
R�> copying/renaming jboss.conf/jboss.jcml to whatever.conf/whatever.jcml
R�> (as outlined yesterday). A better idea (IMHO) would be to put each
R�> configuration in a separate directory, i.e. "/conf/default/jboss.conf"
R�> and "/conf/mysettings/jboss.conf". This would make it easier to code
R�> services(=the filename is always the same and can be accessed through
R�> Class.getResource), easier to administrate (copy "conf/default" and
R�> you're good to go), and easier to understand (again, because the names
R�> of the conf files are always the same).
R�> So, is it a good idea to have directory-prefixed configurations instead
R�> of filename-prefixed configurations? May I have your vote please.
+1
But how the configuration is going to be performed - I guess, by
specifying directory name as a parameter for run.bat?
R�> 2. Today everything is bound into the default JNDI namespace. The
R�> drawback of this is that many (almost all actually) of the things that
R�> are bound have no meaning outside of the JVM, such as connection pools,
R�> security managers, transaction manager etc. I propose that they be moved
R�> to the VM-local "java:/" namespace. This would require changing the
R�> binding and the lookup places, but all in all that should be pretty
R�> minor.
R�> Does this seem like a good idea? May I have your vote please.
+1
I guess, this would make the "java:..." lookups work faster - that's
sufficient for me to vote for your proposition.
BTW, your variant of JaasSecurityManagerService really works :-)
I don't understand how it works, but it's cooool!
(I thought that my variant was top tricky - I was wrong :-)
Best regards,
Oleg
