users@jms-spec.java.net

[jms-spec users] Re: Message Observers

From: Reza Rahman <reza_rahman_at_lycos.com>
Date: Mon, 06 Jun 2011 20:52:59 -0400

John,

Good to hear from you.

I agree with you that if we go the higher level message listener route
in JMS 2, CDI events are really the way to go. Creating yet another
component model certainly does not make much sense to me and goes the
opposite direction on where Java EE 7 is going overall by consolidating
the various legacy-ish component models around managed beans/CDI.

If we decide this is a valid priority for JMS 2, perhaps it is good idea
to join the EG?

Cheers,
Reza


On 6/6/2011 8:33 PM, John D. Ament wrote:
> Greetings (and I hope that this is going to all of the experts as well
> :-) )
>
> First and foremost, since it came up recently, this message, nor the
> ideas represented with in it, are my own sole thoughts and opinions
> and are in no way the thoughts or opinions of my employer.
>
> It looks like one of the ideas floating around is to simplify message
> listening. For those unaware, I work on an open source project called
> Seam JMS, which aims to simplify the JMS programming model while
> leveraging the JSR-299 development paradigm. One of the ideas we've
> been tinkering with is how to process JMS messages as CDI events,
> essentially creating simpler message "handlers" yet still supporting
> all of the transaction, isolation capabilities that come with MDBs.
> As has been noted, this isn't really an EE supported behavior. In
> addition, we support the opposite effect, fired CDI events can be sent
> via JMS. It's completely typesafe, The events can be either JMS
> message types or POJOs or any type of object. We dynamically convert
> types back and forth at runtime by scanning supported calls at
> deployment time.
>
> I'm not sure if it would be of any interest to understand some of the
> inner workings of the frameworks, but based on what I've seen on here
> it may be a good match architecturally for what you're looking for.
>
> - John
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com>
> Version: 10.0.1382 / Virus Database: 1511/3685 - Release Date: 06/06/11
>