I don't think it would.. we would add a new ACK MODE... INDIVIDUAL_ACKNOWLEDGE

if the new ack mode is used, then you would have a new behaviour defined by the new mode. I don't see any problems with that.

On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 4:52 PM, John D. Ament <john.d.ament@gmail.com> wrote:

I think when we spoke about it, it would cause current API
breakage/behavioral changes.

Maybe if we add a new method that did the individual ACK we could avoid it?

On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 2:57 PM, Clebert Suconic
<clebert.suconic@gmail.com> wrote:
> Something for next version... (maintenance version or something)
>
> I feel like I had already talked about this long time ago... sorry if did..
>
>
> I have googled at a few Messaging implementations and I have seen lot of
> them supporting individual acks as an extension:
>
>
> http://docs.oracle.com/cd/E19909-01/817-3728/program.html
>
> http://activemq.apache.org/maven/apidocs/org/apache/activemq/ActiveMQSession.html#INDIVIDUAL_ACKNOWLEDGE
>
> http://docs.jboss.org/hornetq/2.3.0.beta1/docs/user-manual/html/pre-acknowledge.html#individual-ack
>
>
> https://docs.tibco.com/pub/enterprise_message_service/6.3.0-february-2012/doc/html/tib_ems_api_reference/api/dotNET/html/M_TIBCO_EMS_Message_Acknowledge.htm
>
> WebSphereMQ seems also to have something but I would need to research more.
> It's enough to say that it seems it has something there.
>
> So, Why not make it standard?
>
>
> The behaviour would be.. message.acknowledge would only ack the message
> acked and not previous message as it is on the CLIENT_ACK method.
>
>
> WDYT?

--
Clebert Suconic
http://community.jboss.org/people/clebert.suconic@jboss.com
http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com