activemq-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Clebert Suconic <clebert.suco...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: URL Schema on ActiveMQ6 Discussion (ACTIVEMQ6-7)
Date Fri, 12 Dec 2014 03:30:57 GMT
thanks,


I'm making progress... I'm implementing a model of factories and
abstracts.. I should send the PR around early next week.

We will be using the same URL schema for acceptors, configuring the server
as well.. what should simplify the configuration.


I will provide some more information next week...


and Yes! I will use BeanUtils... I was asking here just to double check
there wouldn't be any reason against it.

On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 7:10 AM, Dejan Bosanac <dejan@nighttale.net> wrote:
>
> Hi Clebert,
>
> yeah, I think using BeanUtils makes sense. I’m all for using existing libs
> than maintaining our own
>
> BeanUtils.populate() seems to be what we need
>
>
> http://commons.apache.org/proper/commons-beanutils/apidocs/org/apache/commons/beanutils/BeanUtils.html#populate(java.lang.Object
> ,
> java.util.Map)
>
>
>
> Regards
> --
> Dejan Bosanac
> ----------------------
> Red Hat, Inc.
> dbosanac@redhat.com
> Twitter: @dejanb
> Blog: http://sensatic.net
> ActiveMQ in Action: http://www.manning.com/snyder/
>
> On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 11:51 PM, Clebert Suconic <
> clebert.suconic@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > We have recently implemented URL schemas for ConnectionFactories on
> > Activemq6 and I'm currently extending that support through ACTIVEMQ6-7
> > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACTIVEMQ6-7>
> >
> >
> > I then looked at how that's done on ActiveMQ5 and there's some
> refactoring
> > done through IntrospectionSupport (i) to set properties through the URL
> > properties.
> >
> >
> > I was thinking about using BeanUtils now instead of doing our own
> > reflection. That would make us to include another dependency towards
> > BeanUtils though.. and I'm always up to have the embedded version having
> as
> > little dependencies as possible. But I believe BeanUtils would be a small
> > add on to the dependency tree.
> >
> >
> > Does anyone see any reason against adding BeanUtils and doing our own
> > reflection instead?
> >
> >
> >
> > (i):
> >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/activemq/blob/trunk/activemq-client/src/main/java/org/apache/activemq/util/IntrospectionSupport.java
> >
>


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

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message