Mailing-List: contact dev-help@mina.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@mina.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of mbosteels.dns@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.132.249 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=beta;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
        b=DZkYsdJAeEZpGKlNw3rnvNJZ6rIzbhZPn/h6U/vjo/05nSYuEiLJ0BEtYrI30C36IB1gy/RePuctH9RCTbtvv0+cqGGlJ5wVdaaEQkfDhdEHPFK5Z2bsqDdjCOeVJZ+mXaa+u2T3S05iZtiq7vqgOWcaXEK/ar56gE19+JjkqUg=
Message-ID: <5e87acee0710021053o47438236g27870b46fa32299b@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2007 19:53:42 +0200
From: "Maarten Bosteels" <mbosteels.dns@gmail.com>
To: dev@mina.apache.org
Subject: Re: Meta Transport: an idea on implementing reconnection and proxy
In-Reply-To: <768dcb2e0710020832m6778e2dcwb8572d17a7704f57@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <768dcb2e0709301210w6b485283v2bb789c0bdf8e3e6@mail.gmail.com>
	 <4701FE3E.2020406@trillian.se>
	 <768dcb2e0710020832m6778e2dcwb8572d17a7704f57@mail.gmail.com>

I agree with everybody else that the decorator pattern is an elegant solution.
About system properties, I agree with Trustin: I don't think we should
support that.

Maarten

On 10/2/07, Trustin Lee <trustin@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 10/2/07, Niklas Therning <niklas@trillian.se> wrote:
> > Yes, I think this is the way to go about implementing this kinds of
> > things. This is similar to what was suggested the last time the proxy
> > issue came up on the mailing list
> > (http://www.nabble.com/Proxy-filter-tf3880454.html).
>
> How did you find that thread? :)
>
> > Now, one thing we should consider is whether we want to support
> > specifying proxyHost, proxyPort via system properties, just like Socket
> > does. In that case I don't think it will be as simple as wrapping like
> > suggested above. Maybe we could support this by having some kind of
> > factory which looks at the system properties?
>
> I agree with you that things will get complicated with system
> properties.  The questions is, do we really need to support system
> properties?  If a user uses a factory like Spring, he or she could
> configure proxied connection very easily.
>
> Trustin
> --
> what we call human nature is actually human habit
> --
> http://gleamynode.net/
> --
> PGP Key ID: 0x0255ECA6
>