jsr343-experts@jms-spec.java.net

[jsr343-experts] Re: [jms-spec users] Re: JMS Support for DI

From: Nigel Deakin <nigel.deakin_at_oracle.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2011 16:59:19 +0000

On 11/11/2011 16:08, Clebert Suconic wrote:
> I'm not sure I like this next proposal... so, another brain storm...
which one don't you like?

>
> What if we had 4 basic objects?
>
> NewConnectionFactory
> NewConsumer.... created with cf.createConsumer(queue);
> NewProducer .... created with cf.createConsumer(queue);
> NewRequestResponse... created with cf.createRequestResponse(queueSend, queueConsume); That would be a
> Consumer/Producer mixed in a single object for the case of the request/response.
>

Can you explain what you mean by "request/response" here? Are you describing the requestor application or the responder
application? Are you thinking of EE or SE?

>
> Anything different than that would have to go through JTA. (Merge on JTA would take care of placing everything as part
> of the same TX)
>
>
> No more need for Contexts on that case.

As I wrote earlier, I don't think we should assume that the RM implements isSameRM() to return true.

>
>
> Just a brain storm..I'm not 100% sure about if I like it or not.

I don't think we're there yet.

I still like my own proposal from yesterday. Can you take a look and let me know what you think? Would you like me to
explain it better?

Nigel