Do you need property substitutions in XSLT-augmented configs?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
4 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Do you need property substitutions in XSLT-augmented configs?

Ondrej Zizka
Currently, during XSLT transformation,

     <socket-binding name="management-native" interface="management" port="${jboss.management.native.port:9999}"/>

becomes

     <socket-binding name="management-native" interface="management" port="<new-value>"/>

Is it ok or do you need it to be

     <socket-binding name="management-native" interface="management" port="${jboss.management.native.port:<new-value>}"/>

?

Ondra



_______________________________________________
jboss-as7-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-as7-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Do you need property substitutions in XSLT-augmented configs?

kkhan
In the testsuite, either is fine (unless we have some tests checking the model for expressions).
However, rather than performing the xslt mentioned to change the ports it sounds simpler to supply the properties when running the tests, e.g.
>      <socket-binding name="management-native" interface="management" port="${jboss.management.native.port:9999}"/>

and -Djboss.management.native.port=<new-value>

On 21 Feb 2012, at 07:07, Ondrej Zizka wrote:

> Currently, during XSLT transformation,
>
>      <socket-binding name="management-native" interface="management" port="${jboss.management.native.port:9999}"/>
>
> becomes
>
>      <socket-binding name="management-native" interface="management" port="<new-value>"/>
>
> Is it ok or do you need it to be
>
>      <socket-binding name="management-native" interface="management" port="${jboss.management.native.port:<new-value>}"/>
>
> ?
>
> Ondra
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> jboss-as7-dev mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-as7-dev


_______________________________________________
jboss-as7-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-as7-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Do you need property substitutions in XSLT-augmented configs?

Ondrej Zizka
Maybe, for this particular case; but I'm asking in general, e.g. for IP's which are replaced.

BTW, in case I decided to use the properties, are the names final? Are they documented?

Thanks,
Ondra


On Tue, 2012-02-21 at 10:29 +0000, Kabir Khan wrote:
In the testsuite, either is fine (unless we have some tests checking the model for expressions).
However, rather than performing the xslt mentioned to change the ports it sounds simpler to supply the properties when running the tests, e.g.
>      <socket-binding name="management-native" interface="management" port="${jboss.management.native.port:9999}"/>

and -Djboss.management.native.port=<new-value>

On 21 Feb 2012, at 07:07, Ondrej Zizka wrote:

> Currently, during XSLT transformation,
> 
>      <socket-binding name="management-native" interface="management" port="${jboss.management.native.port:9999}"/>
> 
> becomes
> 
>      <socket-binding name="management-native" interface="management" port="<new-value>"/>
> 
> Is it ok or do you need it to be
> 
>      <socket-binding name="management-native" interface="management" port="${jboss.management.native.port:<new-value>}"/>
> 
> ?
> 
> Ondra
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> jboss-as7-dev mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-as7-dev



_______________________________________________
jboss-as7-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-as7-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Do you need property substitutions in XSLT-augmented configs?

Brian Stansberry
The names are final.

Some are documented, some aren't. Their meaning is clear from their
usage. At some point they will be documented.

On 2/21/12 5:30 AM, Ondrej Zizka wrote:

> Maybe, for this particular case; but I'm asking in general, e.g. for
> IP's which are replaced.
>
> BTW, in case I decided to use the properties, are the names final? Are
> they documented?
>
> Thanks,
> Ondra
>
>
> On Tue, 2012-02-21 at 10:29 +0000, Kabir Khan wrote:
>> In the testsuite, either is fine (unless we have some tests checking the model for expressions).
>> However, rather than performing the xslt mentioned to change the ports it sounds simpler to supply the properties when running the tests, e.g.
>> >       <socket-binding name="management-native"  interface="management"  port="${jboss.management.native.port:9999}"/>
>>
>> and -Djboss.management.native.port=<new-value>
>>
>> On 21 Feb 2012, at 07:07, Ondrej Zizka wrote:
>>
>> >  Currently, during XSLT transformation,
>> >
>> >       <socket-binding name="management-native"  interface="management"  port="${jboss.management.native.port:9999}"/>
>> >
>> >  becomes
>> >
>> >       <socket-binding name="management-native"  interface="management"  port="<new-value>"/>
>> >
>> >  Is it ok or do you need it to be
>> >
>> >       <socket-binding name="management-native"  interface="management"  port="${jboss.management.native.port:<new-value>}"/>
>> >
>> >  ?
>> >
>> >  Ondra
>> >
>> >
>> >  _______________________________________________
>> >  jboss-as7-dev mailing list
>> >  [hidden email]  <mailto:[hidden email]>
>> >  https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-as7-dev
>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> jboss-as7-dev mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-as7-dev


--
Brian Stansberry
Principal Software Engineer
JBoss by Red Hat
_______________________________________________
jboss-as7-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-as7-dev