WOW! I swear I didn't read your email before I sent my proposals!
On , Julien Dubois <julien.dubois_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Emran,
> I'm answering your points in order:
> 1) (disclaimer: I'ma Spring guy) : we could also have MDB work outside a
> JEE container (which is useful for batches, or when you don't need a
> container - I'm currently working on a very specific Netty-based http
> server for a client, and we don't even have the Servlet API).
I just proposed a @MessageConsumer annotation. You would have an option
outside of the container.
> 2) Batching JMS messages is a huge issue, I'm all for it. I'd never had
> the need for timed messages, but now that you speak of it, it looks like
> a very good idea too (instead of using TimerTasks like I'm used to do).
> Concerning API enhancements, the transactions/acknowledgement part should
> also be clarified in the current spec.
What a coincidence. +1 on my side.
> 3) In ActiveMQ you can specify a lot of things in your connection string:
> the IPs of the servers, the timeout, etc... This could be interesting to
> standardize this.
We also have ways to instantiate connection factories directly. I would
make a relation to JDBC here. You can make here an analogy to JDBC as you
don't need JNDI to make an initial connection.