Hola, Since you asked for opinions, personally I'm: - In favor of having one clustering implementation, but I think everyone is, no whoop there - Would prefer that clustering, like admin, stay a little module that's easily added to the core (and in general would like to keep the core as small as possible) - Agnostic on JMX versus server.xml (can see equal justification for both)
A lot of this is just style preference. As long as we have a working clustering module, I'm sure it will be fairly easy to have a distro with it and a distro without it. That's why I haven't chimed in much on this, I don't have a strong preference either way. Yoav On 5/4/06, Costin Manolache <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 5/4/06, Remy Maucherat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Costin Manolache wrote: > > It's not about using a mini-jboss architecture, but about a more > > consistent and simpler > > configuration. > > > > IMO JMX should be used for configuration when possible, instead of > > adding more weird > > syntax to server.xml. > > I tried it quite hard at some point (it's the embedded distribution), > and it didn't work out that well. It's actually more complex. > > The first task is to optimize modeler (you'll do it, right ?), and then > maybe to use modeler exclusively in Tomcat (avoiding all direct JMX > dependencies). I'm actually trying to optimize it and finally implement the 'persist changes', but it'll take some time, I get less than 1h per day to work on open source. I would say jboss style config is not _that_ more complex, and even 3.3 style config was acceptable for many modules ( well, people might not agree with that, bit at least it was simple enough ). > > What is 'core module' and not is a complex issue - obviously what > > ships in the 'default' distro will > > change with each release. But clustering seems like a big enough and > > separate enough component to me, if this is not a good candidate for > > 'separate module' - I don't know what would be. It's clearly not used > > by all users, it has 2 implementations, etc. > > And it needs to get back to 1 implementation in a hurry :) I am > conceptually ok with it being a module, though, although I would be > happier if it was in the main tree (this way it's harder to ignore when > the build is broken). :-) Costin
-- Yoav Shapira Nimalex LLC 1 Mifflin Place, Suite 310 Cambridge, MA, USA [EMAIL PROTECTED] / www.yoavshapira.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
