It seems JSR77 has been posted - I think everyone should read it.
What's important is the set of naming conventions for the managed
objects we expose - I strongly believe that we should use those
names wherever we provide the equivalent functionality.
For example ( on what is important for me ):
- 'node' attribute - instead of jvmRoute
- each tomcat instance in a distributed config must know
about all other
- we should start exposing mbeans for JVM, WebModule and
servlets using the naming conventions.
Of course, we should keep backward compat - but all old
attribute names should be eventually deprecated.
As I mentioned in the past, I'm not happy with XmlMapper/Digester
style used for configuration and I'm not happy with either
server.xml format or with the way we save the config.
At this moment I have a very strong belief ( and it's getting
stronger every day ) that we should adopt a configuration
close to the JMX model, where every configurable object
is a named mbean.
That means no more Interceptor/Context/Server/Valve/Listener/etc.
I also thing the configuration should be centered around a
class similar with RuntimeConfigurable on ant, where all the
user settings are stored ( including ${props} ). Any
configuration action that involves persistence should operate
on the RuntimeConfigurable, which should deal with saving
the config ( in a form as close as possible to the original
user configuration ).
While I think XmlMapper/Digester are very powerfull tools, I think
tomcat5 should follow a model that is closer to ant - i.e.
a set of patterns and a flatter configuration file. This has proven
to be easy and is well-understood ( even if I wrote a lot of
code in xmlMapper, I do have troubles sometimes with it, and
nobody can claim it's as easy as ant tasks).
The question is: What do you think :-) ?
Costin
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
