activemq-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Hiram Chirino" <hi...@hiramchirino.com>
Subject Re: Message transforming on broker
Date Wed, 16 Jan 2008 19:30:14 GMT
Patches applied Thanks!  Keep em coming :)

On Jan 16, 2008 3:40 AM, Dejan Bosanac <dejan@nighttale.net> wrote:
> Hi Hiram
>
> On Jan 15, 2008 8:42 PM, Hiram Chirino <hiram@hiramchirino.com> wrote:
> > > - For JSON conversion to work we need to use 1.2.2 version of XStream,
> > > which is currently hardcoded in the pom, but if we apply this change
> > > (https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-1493) we can use it as
> > > normal.
> > >
> >
> > Sure.. We can get those applied.  BTW when you submitted those patches
> > you did not click the check box that said your granting the ASF a lic.
> > to use your patch.  If you get a chance please reattach the patches
> > with those check boxes clicked.
>
> I've just uploaded AMQ-1493 patch again with the grant, the AMQ-943
> had the license in the first place so it should be all good now. Sorry
> about that.
>
>
> >
> > > - the implementation ignores any errors that could happen during
> > > transformation (unknown translator, wrong xml, etc) and uses legacy
> > > translator in those cases. I think this is desired behavior, but if
> > > you think different it could be easily changed.
> >
> > That sounds ok to me.  Perhaps we should add a header to the legacy
> > frame to that folks know that the transformation failed either on the
> > send or subscriber side.
>
> That's great idea.
>
> >
> > >
> > > - the transformation is done when user sends or subscribes with the
> > > "transformation" header. Also, if the JMS client sends a message with
> > > "transformation" header set it will be transformed before delivered to
> > > the STOMP client even if it has not subscribed with the
> > > "transformation" header. The subscription "transformation" has a
> > > priority against message "transformation" in case that both are set
> > >
> >
> > The one fishy thing is that it sounds like it's being used like a
> > content-type.  Perhaps we should make the "transformation" purely a
> > transient header that only controls sender / subscriber behavior.
>
> Makes sense. Will change that.
>
> > > - the open question is how to add a support configuration of XStream
> > > (and other marshallers) in the Spring context. The current
> > > implementation is nice, but to be really useful people needs (or at
> > > least I do) to have configured XStream to handle desired XML(JSON)
> > > format. The transport layer is not easily exposed to the spring
> > > application context. I found one solution that could work, but is not
> > > so elegant.
> > >
> >
> > This sounds fine to me!  Please make it a separate patch.
>
> Great.
>
> > Oh an BTW..  once we get this committed..
> >
> > I'd like to work on making the default jms-xml transformation support
> > all the JMS message types, especially MapMessage.
>
> Definitely, converting arrays, hashtables, etc to map messages would
> be very useful.
>
> I think it would be best to commit these patch and then I'll continue
> to work further on Spring support, other transporters and message
> types from there. I'll also document it in the AMQ and Stomp wikis and
> create a "reference implementation" in a PHP client.
>
>
> Thanks
> --
> Dejan Bosanac
> www.scriptinginjava.net
>



-- 
Regards,
Hiram

Blog: http://hiramchirino.com

Open Source SOA
http://open.iona.com

Mime
View raw message