Clebert,
maybe I get the issue you raise wrong, but isn't it enough for JMS 2.0
to be backward compatible? I.e. all applications that use JMS 1.1 must
run in a 2.0 compatible container, but not all applications that run in
a 2.0 compatible container must also run in a 1.1 container?
So the clientId can be optional in 2.0 without breaking forward
compatibility.
Rüdiger
On 14.09.2011 18:09, Clebert Suconic wrote:
> The only issue I see though, is how to be at the same time compatible
> with JMS 1.1 and JMS 2.
>
> I mean, if we need (for compatibility reasons) have to support both
> versions given the user's choice, the implementation will have several
> ifs that I don't like.
>
>
> (Say If I still want to deliver a jms-1.1 compatible implementation).
>
>
> That starts another question: Do we need to be compatible with 1.1 or
> that will be just be up to each implementor?
>
>