[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2246?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12580126#action_12580126
]
Joe Bohn commented on GERONIMO-2246:
------------------------------------
Should we move this along to 2.2 given that we have more critical issues for
2.1.1? Is it still a concern?
> Why resource-env-ref:admin-object-module?
> -----------------------------------------
>
> Key: GERONIMO-2246
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2246
> Project: Geronimo
> Issue Type: Bug
> Security Level: public(Regular issues)
> Components: connector, deployment
> Affects Versions: 1.1, 2.0.x, 2.1, 2.1.1
> Reporter: Aaron Mulder
> Assignee: David Jencks
> Fix For: 2.0.x, 2.1.1
>
>
> When mapping resource-env-refs (or a message-destination), It doesn't seem
> like admin-object-module is necessary. It can be provided alongside
> admin-object-name in order to narrow the search down to a specific module
> within an EAR (the current EAR or any EAR in the dependency graph that has a
> module with that name). However, if you need to specify a module, you can
> just use:
> <pattern>
> <module>jms.rar</module>
> <name>foo</name>
> </pattern>
> Instead of using admin-object-module and admin-object-name. It doesn't seem
> like this redundancy gets us anything, so I'd rather remove
> admin-object-module and make admin-object-link work like any other
> resource/EJB link (name only -- use "pattern" for more complex stuff).
> If we proceed, I don't think we necessarily want to remove it in 1.1.x
> (breaking backward compatibility with 1.1.0) -- we can remove it in 1.2 and
> remove message-destination-link at the same time.
> David J, could you comment?
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
