On 11/8/06, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Bernd Fondermann wrote: > On 11/7/06, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If yes, then please note that my implementation has no direct access > to Matchers/Mailet instances, it only works on their Config objects. > Furthermore we are probably reaching limits of the somewhat static > view the RM has of James - these managed object are highly subject to > configuration. > > In JMX though it would be easy to collect a specialized MBean for > every Processor/Mailet/Matcher. > > Bernd The comment was a "long term" comment: imo now the best thing is what you already did. In future I would like to have mailets to publish their own mbean for management/monitoring tasks.
Just to not confuse things, but I think you already meant this: Today, every mailet does already publish a dedicated standard MBean instance on its own. But the MBean is not Mailet-type-specific, it offers standard functionality regardless of Mailet type.
Furthermore now the StateAwareProcessorList is the default processor but is configurable, so in future it should be the stateawareprocessorlist to publish that commands because another processor could have a different configuration method.
Ok. Bernd --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
