Juha mentioned in a related thread that JMX 1.2 work has started in HEAD. Since 3.2 will be in production for a while, it makes sense to back-port JMX 1.2 to JBoss 3.2 as well.
On the other hand, Bill rolled back HEAD to 3.2.
Does this mean that JMX was back-ported to 3.2 with the roll-back?
Juha, Bill, your direction would be helpful here.
have not checked the state of the CVS since the recent rollback changes, whether 4.0 HEAD JMX code was backported to the new HEAD (I'd assume no, but I really haven't had a chance to look yet).
What was implemented security wise was 1.1 security (wrt MBeanServerFactory class), Adrian started 1.2 JMX implementation, some parts are done but I don't know if he got to security (I suspect no but I really haven't looked at it yet).
I'm a little behind schedule.
Dhaval Shah had a good comment about incorporating MC4J from Sapient into JBoss.
Another alternative worth looking at is XMojo from AdventNet.
The JBoss Group has been very good so far at selecting the best in breed from the open source community and embracing it even if it means replacement of existing JBoss implementations.
I asked Dhaval to prepare an in-depth side by side comparison between MC4J, XMojo and JBossMX so that we can discuss the options.
Replacement of JBossMX won't happen due to the classloading and other extensions provided by our implementation that the JBoss server requires.
XMojo is a JMX 1.0 compatible implementation according to their website.
MC4J is a management console, not a JMX implementation.