I don't see it as naming at all, which is why I raised the issue.
Public or private is a boolean choice that also imputes other meaning.
A command domain would allow logical groupings of any number, the
meaning/intent is an orthogonal issue. A command domain could also
imply the contract between client and server which might differ for
each command domain.
Lloyd
On Apr 3, 2009, at 10:55 AM, Jerome Dochez wrote:
>
> On Apr 3, 2009, at 10:48 AM, Lloyd Chambers wrote:
>
>> Instead of visibility why not something like @Domain which
>> indicates the context root? Then we'd have a generic scoping
>> mechanism:
>>
>> http://localhost:8080/__asadmin/....
>> http://localhost:8080/__private/....
>> http://localhost:8080/__mygoodies/....
> that's exactly what happens behind de scene.
>
> what difference does it make if it is triggered by @Domain versus
> @Visibility. Is this just a question of naming convention ?
>
>
>>
>> Lloyd
>>
>> On Apr 2, 2009, at 10:59 PM, Jerome Dochez wrote:
>>
>>> Hi All
>>>
>>> Hong asked me if we could add the ability to have private commands
>>> to v3. Private commands are remote commands that can be used by
>>> our tools like jsr88client, IDE tools, and GUI but users would not
>>> have access to using the normal CLI client. The point is not to
>>> protect or securely prevent commands to be executed by random
>>> users, it's simply about obfuscating them so users don't access
>>> them innocently as they won't be supported across releases. Please
>>> note that the current mechanism could be extended to secure
>>> invocations but I think it's an overkill at this point.
>>>
>>> I have just added the feature so to define a new private command
>>> you just need to annotate your AdminCommand implementation with
>>> @Visibility annotation and let the system do the rest.
>>>
>>> example :
>>>
>>> @Service(name="my-private-command")
>>> @Visibility(Private.class)
>>> public class MyPrivateCommand implements AdminCommand {
>>> ...
>>> }
>>>
>>> So far there are only two types of visibility defined in the system
>>>
>>> @Visibility(Public.class)
>>> @Visibility(Private.class)
>>>
>>> we could add more to bind commands to even stricter clients like
>>> for instance @Visbility(MySuperTool.class) but I don't think we
>>> will have to go that far. If you don't annotate your AdminCommand
>>> implementation it gets the default visibility of Public.
>>>
>>> If you try to invoke a private command from the asadmin CLI, you
>>> will get a disappointing result but feel free to try. Private
>>> commands are available on a different context root than the one
>>> used by the CLI.
>>>
>>> Let me know if you have any questions.
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>>>
>>
>> Lloyd Chambers
>> lloyd.chambers_at_sun.com
>> GlassFish Team
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>
Lloyd Chambers
lloyd.chambers_at_sun.com
GlassFish Team