-
15. Re: Proposed JBESB Configuration File Schema (JBESB-119)
"mark.little@jboss.com" wrote:
Stepping back a moment: what's the estimate of time and effort to change the current configuration approach used by GpListener and friends?
I'd guess this is what we're talking about:
1. Change GpListener to get PM to read load the config (instead of DomElement)
2. Change all code in GpListener that access GpListener config params + Listener wiring config
3. Change all Listeners that access config params through DomElement
4. Change the ActionDefinition code to access ActionProcessor wiring config info through
5. Changing all the unit and QA tests
6. Changing the Trailblazer
Hmmm, I wouldn't be surprised if you had little/no change left out of 7/8 days to be honest. I suppose one could bull into it and get it done quicker, but I'd bet they and others would be dealing with that for weeks after."mark.little@jboss.com" wrote:
Time is of the essence here, so something very invasive may not be the best approach until after the RC.
+1 -
16. Re: Proposed JBESB Configuration File Schema (JBESB-119)
The TB is going to be re-written as part of my tasks for the GA, so you can remove that from your list.
-
17. Re: Proposed JBESB Configuration File Schema (JBESB-119)
"daniel.brum@jboss.com" wrote:
The TB is going to be re-written as part of my tasks for the GA, so you can remove that from your list.
Can it rally be removed?? Will there be a period of time where there is no TB? -
18. Re: Proposed JBESB Configuration File Schema (JBESB-119)
Dave, it sounds like this may be more invasive than originally thought. I suggest a two pronged approach. Let's push the replacement back to after the RC. In the meantime, let's look at putting schemas in place for the configuration files that are already there. Arvinder added a validation tool so we should be able to leverage that.