Mbeans for Blueprint

[Rex Wang-2]

This topic might be a little bit independent from what we are doing in current osgi integration work. However, I would like to raise such discussion because I believe blueprint will act as an important role in our future framework. So, if we wanna leverage blueprint as a common way to construct geronimo plugins and hope use JMX for remote management, we definitely need a set of mbeans to track the blueprint bundles. Currently, I am working on this work item.

OSGi Alliance is planing to release an enterprise spec which contains rfc 139(mbeans for core framework and 3 compendium services), but there is no mbeans for blueprint. So I think our jobs go ahead of the standard. We did a quick look on karaf and spring dm, and did not found them using mbeans to track and manage the state of blueprint. I hope the works we are doing are helpful as a complement of rfc 139.

OK, although RFC139 says it is not to provide a generic mechanism that be used to expose management of arbitrary OSGi services through JMX, we still deside to keep our design consistent with it. That is to leverage the openmbean's open type in the data structure of mbeans' return value, such as compositeType, tabularType.. And there is not too much APIs exposed by blueprint, so I think only one Mbean is enough right now.

A problem is that how we track the status. In the rfc124 spec, blueprint bundle's status can be identified by listening the events that pre-defined. The blueprint extender sends those events to the Event Admin service, but in RFC 139 there is no mbeans designed to manage the event admin. So looks like we need a mbean provides the APIs to track bluepirnt application and its implementation must also implement the BlueprintListener interface. That is what we are thinking currently.

Is anybody insteresting on this topic or do you know anythings behind the scenes from Karaf/Springsource that say why they seems not plan to design such mbeans?
Any comments is appreciated.

Regards
-Rex

[Forrest_Xia]

On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 1:54 PM, Rex Wang <rwonly@...> wrote:

...
A problem is that how we track the status. In the rfc124 spec, blueprint bundle's status can be identified by listening the events that pre-defined. The blueprint extender sends those events to the Event Admin service, 

but in RFC 139 there is no mbeans designed to manage the event admin.

In the spec, there is a requirement like this:
"The solution SHOULD define a JMX integration of critical compendium services such as the configuration  administration, logging, event administration and preferences services. "

So seems currently there are deviations from this requirement.

Forrest

[gnodet]

There are discussions about implementing rfc 139 inside the Aries
podling, so maybe it would make sense to discuss that in this context
too.

From a Karaf pov, I think it would really make sense to add such an
mbean.  Do you see a single mbean for the extender that would allow
accessing the BlueprintContext through a tabular data or do you see
one mbean per BLueprintContext ?  I would lean toward the first
solution so keep the coarse grained behavior of rfc 139.

On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 06:54, Rex Wang <rwonly@...> wrote:

> This topic might be a little bit independent from what we are doing in
> current osgi integration work. However, I would like to raise such
> discussion because I believe blueprint will act as an important role in our
> future framework. So, if we wanna leverage blueprint as a common way to
> construct geronimo plugins and hope use JMX for remote management, we
> definitely need a set of mbeans to track the blueprint bundles. Currently, I
> am working on this work item.
>
> OSGi Alliance is planing to release an enterprise spec which contains rfc
> 139(mbeans for core framework and 3 compendium services), but there is no
> mbeans for blueprint. So I think our jobs go ahead of the standard. We did a
> quick look on karaf and spring dm, and did not found them using mbeans to
> track and manage the state of blueprint. I hope the works we are doing are
> helpful as a complement of rfc 139.
>
> OK, although RFC139 says it is not to provide a generic mechanism that be
> used to expose management of arbitrary OSGi services through JMX, we still
> deside to keep our design consistent with it. That is to leverage the
> openmbean's open type in the data structure of mbeans' return value, such as
> compositeType, tabularType.. And there is not too much APIs exposed by
> blueprint, so I think only one Mbean is enough right now.
>
> A problem is that how we track the status. In the rfc124 spec, blueprint
> bundle's status can be identified by listening the events that pre-defined.
> The blueprint extender sends those events to the Event Admin service, but in
> RFC 139 there is no mbeans designed to manage the event admin. So looks like
> we need a mbean provides the APIs to track bluepirnt application and its
> implementation must also implement the BlueprintListener interface. That is
> what we are thinking currently.
>
> Is anybody insteresting on this topic or do you know anythings behind the
> scenes from Karaf/Springsource that say why they seems not plan to design
> such mbeans?
> Any comments is appreciated.
>
> Regards
> -Rex
>

--
Cheers,
Guillaume Nodet
------------------------
Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
------------------------
Open Source SOA
http://fusesource.com

[Rex Wang-2]

2009/10/30 Guillaume Nodet <gnodet@...>

There are discussions about implementing rfc 139 inside the Aries
podling, so maybe it would make sense to discuss that in this context
too.

From a Karaf pov, I think it would really make sense to add such an
mbean.  Do you see a single mbean for the extender that would allow
accessing the BlueprintContext through a tabular data or do you see
one mbean per BLueprintContext ?  I would lean toward the first
solution so keep the coarse grained behavior of rfc 139.

Yes, I am suggesting the first approach.
-Rex
 

On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 06:54, Rex Wang <rwonly@...> wrote:
> This topic might be a little bit independent from what we are doing in
> current osgi integration work. However, I would like to raise such
> discussion because I believe blueprint will act as an important role in our
> future framework. So, if we wanna leverage blueprint as a common way to
> construct geronimo plugins and hope use JMX for remote management, we
> definitely need a set of mbeans to track the blueprint bundles. Currently, I
> am working on this work item.
>
> OSGi Alliance is planing to release an enterprise spec which contains rfc
> 139(mbeans for core framework and 3 compendium services), but there is no
> mbeans for blueprint. So I think our jobs go ahead of the standard. We did a
> quick look on karaf and spring dm, and did not found them using mbeans to
> track and manage the state of blueprint. I hope the works we are doing are
> helpful as a complement of rfc 139.
>
> OK, although RFC139 says it is not to provide a generic mechanism that be
> used to expose management of arbitrary OSGi services through JMX, we still
> deside to keep our design consistent with it. That is to leverage the
> openmbean's open type in the data structure of mbeans' return value, such as
> compositeType, tabularType.. And there is not too much APIs exposed by
> blueprint, so I think only one Mbean is enough right now.
>
> A problem is that how we track the status. In the rfc124 spec, blueprint
> bundle's status can be identified by listening the events that pre-defined.
> The blueprint extender sends those events to the Event Admin service, but in
> RFC 139 there is no mbeans designed to manage the event admin. So looks like
> we need a mbean provides the APIs to track bluepirnt application and its
> implementation must also implement the BlueprintListener interface. That is
> what we are thinking currently.
>
> Is anybody insteresting on this topic or do you know anythings behind the
> scenes from Karaf/Springsource that say why they seems not plan to design
> such mbeans?
> Any comments is appreciated.
>
> Regards
> -Rex
>

--
Cheers,
Guillaume Nodet
------------------------
Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
------------------------
Open Source SOA
http://fusesource.com

[Rick McGuire]

Rex Wang wrote:

>
>
> 2009/10/30 Guillaume Nodet <gnodet@... <mailto:gnodet@...>>
>
>     There are discussions about implementing rfc 139 inside the Aries
>     podling, so maybe it would make sense to discuss that in this context
>     too.
>
>     >From a Karaf pov, I think it would really make sense to add such an
>     mbean.  Do you see a single mbean for the extender that would allow
>     accessing the BlueprintContext through a tabular data or do you see
>     one mbean per BLueprintContext ?  I would lean toward the first
>     solution so keep the coarse grained behavior of rfc 139.
>
> Yes, I am suggesting the first approach.

I think it would also be very valuable to be able to retrieve any
blueprint deployment failures so that
errors can be diagnosed.

Rick

> -Rex
>  
>
>     On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 06:54, Rex Wang <rwonly@...
>     <mailto:rwonly@...>> wrote:
>     > This topic might be a little bit independent from what we are
>     doing in
>     > current osgi integration work. However, I would like to raise such
>     > discussion because I believe blueprint will act as an important
>     role in our
>     > future framework. So, if we wanna leverage blueprint as a common
>     way to
>     > construct geronimo plugins and hope use JMX for remote
>     management, we
>     > definitely need a set of mbeans to track the blueprint bundles.
>     Currently, I
>     > am working on this work item.
>     >
>     > OSGi Alliance is planing to release an enterprise spec which
>     contains rfc
>     > 139(mbeans for core framework and 3 compendium services), but
>     there is no
>     > mbeans for blueprint. So I think our jobs go ahead of the
>     standard. We did a
>     > quick look on karaf and spring dm, and did not found them using
>     mbeans to
>     > track and manage the state of blueprint. I hope the works we are
>     doing are
>     > helpful as a complement of rfc 139.
>     >
>     > OK, although RFC139 says it is not to provide a generic
>     mechanism that be
>     > used to expose management of arbitrary OSGi services through
>     JMX, we still
>     > deside to keep our design consistent with it. That is to
>     leverage the
>     > openmbean's open type in the data structure of mbeans' return
>     value, such as
>     > compositeType, tabularType.. And there is not too much APIs
>     exposed by
>     > blueprint, so I think only one Mbean is enough right now.
>     >
>     > A problem is that how we track the status. In the rfc124 spec,
>     blueprint
>     > bundle's status can be identified by listening the events that
>     pre-defined.
>     > The blueprint extender sends those events to the Event Admin
>     service, but in
>     > RFC 139 there is no mbeans designed to manage the event admin.
>     So looks like
>     > we need a mbean provides the APIs to track bluepirnt application
>     and its
>     > implementation must also implement the BlueprintListener
>     interface. That is
>     > what we are thinking currently.
>     >
>     > Is anybody insteresting on this topic or do you know anythings
>     behind the
>     > scenes from Karaf/Springsource that say why they seems not plan
>     to design
>     > such mbeans?
>     > Any comments is appreciated.
>     >
>     > Regards
>     > -Rex
>     >
>
>
>
>     --
>     Cheers,
>     Guillaume Nodet
>     ------------------------
>     Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
>     ------------------------
>     Open Source SOA
>     http://fusesource.com
>
>

[gnodet]

I would think each blueprint bundle managed by this extender would be
an entry in the tabular data and contain several informations,
including the state and last event(s), so that the error would be
available (or maybe it should be available directly).

On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 10:41, Rick McGuire <rickmcg@...> wrote:

> Rex Wang wrote:
>>
>>
>> 2009/10/30 Guillaume Nodet <gnodet@... <mailto:gnodet@...>>
>>
>>    There are discussions about implementing rfc 139 inside the Aries
>>    podling, so maybe it would make sense to discuss that in this context
>>    too.
>>
>>    >From a Karaf pov, I think it would really make sense to add such an
>>    mbean.  Do you see a single mbean for the extender that would allow
>>    accessing the BlueprintContext through a tabular data or do you see
>>    one mbean per BLueprintContext ?  I would lean toward the first
>>    solution so keep the coarse grained behavior of rfc 139.
>>
>> Yes, I am suggesting the first approach.
>
> I think it would also be very valuable to be able to retrieve any blueprint
> deployment failures so that
> errors can be diagnosed.
> Rick
>>
>> -Rex
>>
>>    On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 06:54, Rex Wang <rwonly@...
>>    <mailto:rwonly@...>> wrote:
>>    > This topic might be a little bit independent from what we are
>>    doing in
>>    > current osgi integration work. However, I would like to raise such
>>    > discussion because I believe blueprint will act as an important
>>    role in our
>>    > future framework. So, if we wanna leverage blueprint as a common
>>    way to
>>    > construct geronimo plugins and hope use JMX for remote
>>    management, we
>>    > definitely need a set of mbeans to track the blueprint bundles.
>>    Currently, I
>>    > am working on this work item.
>>    >
>>    > OSGi Alliance is planing to release an enterprise spec which
>>    contains rfc
>>    > 139(mbeans for core framework and 3 compendium services), but
>>    there is no
>>    > mbeans for blueprint. So I think our jobs go ahead of the
>>    standard. We did a
>>    > quick look on karaf and spring dm, and did not found them using
>>    mbeans to
>>    > track and manage the state of blueprint. I hope the works we are
>>    doing are
>>    > helpful as a complement of rfc 139.
>>    >
>>    > OK, although RFC139 says it is not to provide a generic
>>    mechanism that be
>>    > used to expose management of arbitrary OSGi services through
>>    JMX, we still
>>    > deside to keep our design consistent with it. That is to
>>    leverage the
>>    > openmbean's open type in the data structure of mbeans' return
>>    value, such as
>>    > compositeType, tabularType.. And there is not too much APIs
>>    exposed by
>>    > blueprint, so I think only one Mbean is enough right now.
>>    >
>>    > A problem is that how we track the status. In the rfc124 spec,
>>    blueprint
>>    > bundle's status can be identified by listening the events that
>>    pre-defined.
>>    > The blueprint extender sends those events to the Event Admin
>>    service, but in
>>    > RFC 139 there is no mbeans designed to manage the event admin.
>>    So looks like
>>    > we need a mbean provides the APIs to track bluepirnt application
>>    and its
>>    > implementation must also implement the BlueprintListener
>>    interface. That is
>>    > what we are thinking currently.
>>    >
>>    > Is anybody insteresting on this topic or do you know anythings
>>    behind the
>>    > scenes from Karaf/Springsource that say why they seems not plan
>>    to design
>>    > such mbeans?
>>    > Any comments is appreciated.
>>    >
>>    > Regards
>>    > -Rex
>>    >
>>
>>
>>
>>    --
>>    Cheers,
>>    Guillaume Nodet
>>    ------------------------
>>    Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
>>    ------------------------
>>    Open Source SOA
>>    http://fusesource.com
>>
>>
>
>

--
Cheers,
Guillaume Nodet
------------------------
Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
------------------------
Open Source SOA
http://fusesource.com

[Jarek Gawor-2]

I agree that we should leverage open mbeans for this as much as we
can. Also, I was wondering if we should consider creating namespace
handler that could directly expose individual beans within the
blueprint container as mbeans. But maybe exposing a bean as a service
(and therefore as a mbean) is good enough.

Jarek

On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 1:54 AM, Rex Wang <rwonly@...> wrote:

> This topic might be a little bit independent from what we are doing in
> current osgi integration work. However, I would like to raise such
> discussion because I believe blueprint will act as an important role in our
> future framework. So, if we wanna leverage blueprint as a common way to
> construct geronimo plugins and hope use JMX for remote management, we
> definitely need a set of mbeans to track the blueprint bundles. Currently, I
> am working on this work item.
>
> OSGi Alliance is planing to release an enterprise spec which contains rfc
> 139(mbeans for core framework and 3 compendium services), but there is no
> mbeans for blueprint. So I think our jobs go ahead of the standard. We did a
> quick look on karaf and spring dm, and did not found them using mbeans to
> track and manage the state of blueprint. I hope the works we are doing are
> helpful as a complement of rfc 139.
>
> OK, although RFC139 says it is not to provide a generic mechanism that be
> used to expose management of arbitrary OSGi services through JMX, we still
> deside to keep our design consistent with it. That is to leverage the
> openmbean's open type in the data structure of mbeans' return value, such as
> compositeType, tabularType.. And there is not too much APIs exposed by
> blueprint, so I think only one Mbean is enough right now.
>
> A problem is that how we track the status. In the rfc124 spec, blueprint
> bundle's status can be identified by listening the events that pre-defined.
> The blueprint extender sends those events to the Event Admin service, but in
> RFC 139 there is no mbeans designed to manage the event admin. So looks like
> we need a mbean provides the APIs to track bluepirnt application and its
> implementation must also implement the BlueprintListener interface. That is
> what we are thinking currently.
>
> Is anybody insteresting on this topic or do you know anythings behind the
> scenes from Karaf/Springsource that say why they seems not plan to design
> such mbeans?
> Any comments is appreciated.
>
> Regards
> -Rex
>

[gnodet]

I think those are two separate concerns.  What we were discussion is
to expose one mbean for the blueprint extender that would allow
monitoring the state of the extender and various blueprint bundles.
I think what you are proposing is to allow a user to expose beans over
JMX.  I do agree that this is worthwhile, but that's a totally
different discussion imho.

On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 15:50, Jarek Gawor <jgawor@...> wrote:

> I agree that we should leverage open mbeans for this as much as we
> can. Also, I was wondering if we should consider creating namespace
> handler that could directly expose individual beans within the
> blueprint container as mbeans. But maybe exposing a bean as a service
> (and therefore as a mbean) is good enough.
>
> Jarek
>
> On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 1:54 AM, Rex Wang <rwonly@...> wrote:
>> This topic might be a little bit independent from what we are doing in
>> current osgi integration work. However, I would like to raise such
>> discussion because I believe blueprint will act as an important role in our
>> future framework. So, if we wanna leverage blueprint as a common way to
>> construct geronimo plugins and hope use JMX for remote management, we
>> definitely need a set of mbeans to track the blueprint bundles. Currently, I
>> am working on this work item.
>>
>> OSGi Alliance is planing to release an enterprise spec which contains rfc
>> 139(mbeans for core framework and 3 compendium services), but there is no
>> mbeans for blueprint. So I think our jobs go ahead of the standard. We did a
>> quick look on karaf and spring dm, and did not found them using mbeans to
>> track and manage the state of blueprint. I hope the works we are doing are
>> helpful as a complement of rfc 139.
>>
>> OK, although RFC139 says it is not to provide a generic mechanism that be
>> used to expose management of arbitrary OSGi services through JMX, we still
>> deside to keep our design consistent with it. That is to leverage the
>> openmbean's open type in the data structure of mbeans' return value, such as
>> compositeType, tabularType.. And there is not too much APIs exposed by
>> blueprint, so I think only one Mbean is enough right now.
>>
>> A problem is that how we track the status. In the rfc124 spec, blueprint
>> bundle's status can be identified by listening the events that pre-defined.
>> The blueprint extender sends those events to the Event Admin service, but in
>> RFC 139 there is no mbeans designed to manage the event admin. So looks like
>> we need a mbean provides the APIs to track bluepirnt application and its
>> implementation must also implement the BlueprintListener interface. That is
>> what we are thinking currently.
>>
>> Is anybody insteresting on this topic or do you know anythings behind the
>> scenes from Karaf/Springsource that say why they seems not plan to design
>> such mbeans?
>> Any comments is appreciated.
>>
>> Regards
>> -Rex
>>
>

--
Cheers,
Guillaume Nodet
------------------------
Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
------------------------
Open Source SOA
http://fusesource.com

[Rex Wang-2]

2009/10/30 Guillaume Nodet <gnodet@...>

I would think each blueprint bundle managed by this extender would be
an entry in the tabular data and contain several informations,
including the state and last event(s), so that the error would be
available (or maybe it should be available directly).

Agree. Then the implement of such mbean have to be a BlueprintListener so that it can receive the last event of each blueprint bundle?

-Rex

On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 10:41, Rick McGuire <rickmcg@...> wrote:
> Rex Wang wrote:
>>
>>
>> 2009/10/30 Guillaume Nodet <gnodet@... <mailto:gnodet@...>>
>>
>>    There are discussions about implementing rfc 139 inside the Aries
>>    podling, so maybe it would make sense to discuss that in this context
>>    too.
>>
>>    >From a Karaf pov, I think it would really make sense to add such an
>>    mbean.  Do you see a single mbean for the extender that would allow
>>    accessing the BlueprintContext through a tabular data or do you see
>>    one mbean per BLueprintContext ?  I would lean toward the first
>>    solution so keep the coarse grained behavior of rfc 139.
>>
>> Yes, I am suggesting the first approach.
>
> I think it would also be very valuable to be able to retrieve any blueprint
> deployment failures so that
> errors can be diagnosed.
> Rick
>>
>> -Rex
>>
>>    On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 06:54, Rex Wang <rwonly@...
>>    <mailto:rwonly@...>> wrote:
>>    > This topic might be a little bit independent from what we are
>>    doing in
>>    > current osgi integration work. However, I would like to raise such
>>    > discussion because I believe blueprint will act as an important
>>    role in our
>>    > future framework. So, if we wanna leverage blueprint as a common
>>    way to
>>    > construct geronimo plugins and hope use JMX for remote
>>    management, we
>>    > definitely need a set of mbeans to track the blueprint bundles.
>>    Currently, I
>>    > am working on this work item.
>>    >
>>    > OSGi Alliance is planing to release an enterprise spec which
>>    contains rfc
>>    > 139(mbeans for core framework and 3 compendium services), but
>>    there is no
>>    > mbeans for blueprint. So I think our jobs go ahead of the
>>    standard. We did a
>>    > quick look on karaf and spring dm, and did not found them using
>>    mbeans to
>>    > track and manage the state of blueprint. I hope the works we are
>>    doing are
>>    > helpful as a complement of rfc 139.
>>    >
>>    > OK, although RFC139 says it is not to provide a generic
>>    mechanism that be
>>    > used to expose management of arbitrary OSGi services through
>>    JMX, we still
>>    > deside to keep our design consistent with it. That is to
>>    leverage the
>>    > openmbean's open type in the data structure of mbeans' return
>>    value, such as
>>    > compositeType, tabularType.. And there is not too much APIs
>>    exposed by
>>    > blueprint, so I think only one Mbean is enough right now.
>>    >
>>    > A problem is that how we track the status. In the rfc124 spec,
>>    blueprint
>>    > bundle's status can be identified by listening the events that
>>    pre-defined.
>>    > The blueprint extender sends those events to the Event Admin
>>    service, but in
>>    > RFC 139 there is no mbeans designed to manage the event admin.
>>    So looks like
>>    > we need a mbean provides the APIs to track bluepirnt application
>>    and its
>>    > implementation must also implement the BlueprintListener
>>    interface. That is
>>    > what we are thinking currently.
>>    >
>>    > Is anybody insteresting on this topic or do you know anythings
>>    behind the
>>    > scenes from Karaf/Springsource that say why they seems not plan
>>    to design
>>    > such mbeans?
>>    > Any comments is appreciated.
>>    >
>>    > Regards
>>    > -Rex
>>    >
>>
>>
>>
>>    --
>>    Cheers,
>>    Guillaume Nodet
>>    ------------------------
>>    Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
>>    ------------------------
>>    Open Source SOA
>>    http://fusesource.com
>>
>>
>
>

--

Cheers,
Guillaume Nodet
------------------------
Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
------------------------
Open Source SOA
http://fusesource.com

[Rex Wang-2]

Hi dear all,
The BlueprintMBean design has finished. I'd like to put the api codes in sandbox and request review comments, but seems I can not create a folder for myself in the sandbox?  How to get that?

Thanks in advance!

-Rex

2009/10/31 Rex Wang <rwonly@...>

2009/10/30 Guillaume Nodet <gnodet@...>

I would think each blueprint bundle managed by this extender would be

an entry in the tabular data and contain several informations,
including the state and last event(s), so that the error would be
available (or maybe it should be available directly).

Agree. Then the implement of such mbean have to be a BlueprintListener so that it can receive the last event of each blueprint bundle?

-Rex

On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 10:41, Rick McGuire <rickmcg@...> wrote:
> Rex Wang wrote:
>>
>>
>> 2009/10/30 Guillaume Nodet <gnodet@... <mailto:gnodet@...>>
>>
>>    There are discussions about implementing rfc 139 inside the Aries
>>    podling, so maybe it would make sense to discuss that in this context
>>    too.
>>
>>    >From a Karaf pov, I think it would really make sense to add such an
>>    mbean.  Do you see a single mbean for the extender that would allow
>>    accessing the BlueprintContext through a tabular data or do you see
>>    one mbean per BLueprintContext ?  I would lean toward the first
>>    solution so keep the coarse grained behavior of rfc 139.
>>
>> Yes, I am suggesting the first approach.
>
> I think it would also be very valuable to be able to retrieve any blueprint
> deployment failures so that
> errors can be diagnosed.
> Rick
>>
>> -Rex
>>
>>    On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 06:54, Rex Wang <rwonly@...
>>    <mailto:rwonly@...>> wrote:
>>    > This topic might be a little bit independent from what we are
>>    doing in
>>    > current osgi integration work. However, I would like to raise such
>>    > discussion because I believe blueprint will act as an important
>>    role in our
>>    > future framework. So, if we wanna leverage blueprint as a common
>>    way to
>>    > construct geronimo plugins and hope use JMX for remote
>>    management, we
>>    > definitely need a set of mbeans to track the blueprint bundles.
>>    Currently, I
>>    > am working on this work item.
>>    >
>>    > OSGi Alliance is planing to release an enterprise spec which
>>    contains rfc
>>    > 139(mbeans for core framework and 3 compendium services), but
>>    there is no
>>    > mbeans for blueprint. So I think our jobs go ahead of the
>>    standard. We did a
>>    > quick look on karaf and spring dm, and did not found them using
>>    mbeans to
>>    > track and manage the state of blueprint. I hope the works we are
>>    doing are
>>    > helpful as a complement of rfc 139.
>>    >
>>    > OK, although RFC139 says it is not to provide a generic
>>    mechanism that be
>>    > used to expose management of arbitrary OSGi services through
>>    JMX, we still
>>    > deside to keep our design consistent with it. That is to
>>    leverage the
>>    > openmbean's open type in the data structure of mbeans' return
>>    value, such as
>>    > compositeType, tabularType.. And there is not too much APIs
>>    exposed by
>>    > blueprint, so I think only one Mbean is enough right now.
>>    >
>>    > A problem is that how we track the status. In the rfc124 spec,
>>    blueprint
>>    > bundle's status can be identified by listening the events that
>>    pre-defined.
>>    > The blueprint extender sends those events to the Event Admin
>>    service, but in
>>    > RFC 139 there is no mbeans designed to manage the event admin.
>>    So looks like
>>    > we need a mbean provides the APIs to track bluepirnt application
>>    and its
>>    > implementation must also implement the BlueprintListener
>>    interface. That is
>>    > what we are thinking currently.
>>    >
>>    > Is anybody insteresting on this topic or do you know anythings
>>    behind the
>>    > scenes from Karaf/Springsource that say why they seems not plan
>>    to design
>>    > such mbeans?
>>    > Any comments is appreciated.
>>    >
>>    > Regards
>>    > -Rex
>>    >
>>
>>
>>
>>    --
>>    Cheers,
>>    Guillaume Nodet
>>    ------------------------
>>    Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
>>    ------------------------
>>    Open Source SOA
>>    http://fusesource.com
>>
>>
>
>

--

Cheers,
Guillaume Nodet
------------------------
Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
------------------------
Open Source SOA
http://fusesource.com

[kevan]

On Nov 10, 2009, at 2:23 AM, Rex Wang wrote:

> Hi dear all,
> The BlueprintMBean design has finished. I'd like to put the api  
> codes in sandbox and request review comments, but seems I can not  
> create a folder for myself in the sandbox?  How to get that?

Hmm. Don't know what might be wrong, offhand... What is the error you  
are getting?

--kevan

[kevan]

On Nov 10, 2009, at 2:23 AM, Rex Wang wrote:

> Hi dear all,
> The BlueprintMBean design has finished. I'd like to put the api  
> codes in sandbox and request review comments, but seems I can not  
> create a folder for myself in the sandbox?  How to get that?

Following works just fine for me... Can you give it a try and give  
specific error that you're getting...

$ mkdir foo
$ svn add foo
A         foo
$ svn ci --message "test directory create" foo
Adding         foo

Committed revision 834454.
$

Also, unless I'm being really unresponsive, would prefer not to be  
directly cc:ed. Otherwise, mail sorting and reply-to may not work as  
normal...

--kevan

[Rex Wang-2]

Thanks Kevan! Looks like there was some problems on my windows.. Now I get it work.

-Rex

2009/11/10 Kevan Miller <kevan.miller@...>

On Nov 10, 2009, at 2:23 AM, Rex Wang wrote:

Hi dear all,
The BlueprintMBean design has finished. I'd like to put the api codes in sandbox and request review comments, but seems I can not create a folder for myself in the sandbox?  How to get that?

Following works just fine for me... Can you give it a try and give specific error that you're getting...

$ mkdir foo
$ svn add foo
A         foo
$ svn ci --message "test directory create" foo
Adding         foo

Committed revision 834454.
$

Also, unless I'm being really unresponsive, would prefer not to be directly cc:ed. Otherwise, mail sorting and reply-to may not work as normal...

--kevan