Having all empty parent contexts removed whenever the
last entry of a child context is removed doesn't seem
a common operation to me. The structure typically exists
independent of any context bindings.
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Jencks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2001 2:05 PM
Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] org.jboss.naming.Util feature question
> I thought he meant if someone binds a DataSource to
> java:/jdbc/mydbs/OracleDS and this is the only context in jdbc or
> jdbc/mydbs then Util.unbind("jdbc/mydbs/OracleDS") would remove jdbc,
> jdbc/mydbs, and jdbc/mydbs/OracleDS.
>
> Personally I'd like this. cleans up crap from deploying these nested
> contexts when they are undeployed.
>
> david jencks
>
>
>
> On 2001.11.28 16:13:08 -0500 Scott M Stark wrote:
> >
> > This doesn't sound too useful unless given:
> > > A/B/C/val1
> > > A/B/C/val2
> > > A/D/val3
> >
> > I can do Util.unbind("A") to wipe out A and its entire tree in one
> > call similar to rm -rf on a directory. If that is what you indicating
> > then its a useful option.
> >
> > xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Scott Stark
> > Chief Technology Officer
> > JBoss Group, LLC
> > xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "David Budworth" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2001 12:39 PM
> > Subject: [JBoss-dev] org.jboss.naming.Util feature question
> >
> >
> > > I was just wondering if anyone would like org.jboss.naming.Util to
have
> > > an unbind feature.
> > >
> > > Unbinding by hand is easy enough, but I need (and am using in a
> > subclass
> > > of Util for my own project) the ability to make unbind remove the
> > > intermediate contexts if they are empty.
> > >
> > > ie:
> > >
> > > A/B/C/val1
> > > A/B/C/val2
> > > A/D/val3
> > >
> > > unbind(A/B/C/val1)
> > >
> > > would only remove "val1" from the A/B/C context
> > >
> > > then doing unbind(A/B/C/val2) // after you already unbound val1
> > >
> > > wiht remove val2, C, B contexts (but not A since it had more than one
> > > subcontext)
> > >
> > >
> > > I'd like to add this to the Util class, but wasn't sure if anyone else
> > > thought it was usefull, or what it should be called. I call mine
> > > "unbind", because it's the opposite of bind() which creates subctx.
> > >
> > > But the unweary may not realize that it nukes intermediates. So maybe
> > > call it unbindTree ?
> > >
> > > -David
> > >
> > > p.s. Do people normally just add stuff and wait for someone to
> > complain?
> > > If so, I'll stop posting questions about these little mods, and just
> > > implement them, and fix em if someone bitches.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Jboss-development mailing list
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
> > >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Jboss-development mailing list
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Jboss-development mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
>
_______________________________________________
Jboss-development mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
