On 01/02/2013 14:30, in the thread "Late change: A.3.2 Meaning of noLocal with shared topic subscriptions",
Nigel Deakin wrote:
> Thanks for the responses to my questions on what we should do about the meaning of noLocal with shared topic
> subscriptions (which was listed in A.3.2 as an unresolved issue):
[snip]
>
> I am going to take this as a consensus that the noLocal parameter doesn't have a useful purpose with shared
> subscriptions and that we should drop it as a feature.
>
> The noLocal parameter will remain for non-shared subscriptions (i.e. no change to the JMS 1.1 methods).
>
> This is now a final call for views before I go ahead and drop this feature.
I think dropping this is a good idea. I have now made the necessary changes. Here are the main changes:
Changes to Session:
-------------------
Removed:
createSharedConsumer(Topic topic, String sharedSubscriptionName, java.lang.String messageSelector,
boolean noLocal)
Changed:
createSharedDurableConsumer(Topic topic, String name, String messageSelector, boolean noLocal)
To:
createSharedDurableConsumer(Topic topic, String name, String messageSelector)
Changes to JMSContext
---------------------
Removed:
createSharedConsumer(
Topic topic, String sharedSubscriptionName, java.lang.String messageSelector, boolean noLocal);
Changed:
createSharedDurableConsumer(Topic topic, String name, String messageSelector, boolean noLocal);
To:
createSharedDurableConsumer(Topic topic, String name, String messageSelector);
I have also adjusted the javadocs and spec to reflect this.
Nigel