That would be great! Thanks Ant. Paul
On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 1:42 PM, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 1:27 PM, Asankha C. Perera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Hi Andreas >> >> I was wondering whether there is somewhere a specification or documentation >> that gives a clear overview of what types of messages Synapse's JMS >> transport is supposed to accept and how it should process these messages. >> More precisely I'm looking for a document that contains requirements such as >> "If the incoming message is a BytesMessage and has a 'Content-Type' >> property, then the transport ..." etc. Is there already something like that? >> >> >> Sorry, there isn't much external documentation yet..except in my head :-) >> .. however, I have been planning to update the JMS transport to handle JTA >> transactions for sometime, and I also wanted to change the design to support >> both JMS 1.0 and 1.1 in a better way. Some of the current issues we have >> came about as we came across a user who wanted JMS 1.0 support, at which >> point we updated the codebase to JMS 1.0 from what we had (i.e. 1.1). >> >> We also have plans to adhere to the proposed binding for SOAP over JMS >> specification<http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/ws-axis-dev/200701.mbox/[EMAIL >> PROTECTED]>. >> At the same time, we need to update our code to not use setMessageListener() >> etc. which the newer JEE app servers (such as WebSphere) does not allow.. >> >> If not, are there people who are interested in helping to write this kind >> of specification? Note that I believe that the current behavior of the JMS >> transport is not always appropriate. E.g. a BytesMessage with Content-Type >> 'text/plain; charset=...' produces a binary wrapper, while I would expect a >> text wrapper. Therefore the specs to be written would focus on the to-be >> situation rather than the as-is situation. >> >> I would certainly be very interested to keep working on the JMS transport >> and I believe that with your help and that of any others in the community, >> we could really improve the current implementation to be much better >> >> asankha >> > > How about also something like an SCA compatibility mode so Synapse could sit > in front of Tuscany/SCA JMS services? It would mainly be just setting some > header properties. I'm mostly a lurker on the Synapse list these days but i > could help from the SCA specification and Tuscany interop side of things. > > ...ant > -- Paul Fremantle Co-Founder and CTO, WSO2 Apache Synapse PMC Chair OASIS WS-RX TC Co-chair blog: http://pzf.fremantle.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Oxygenating the Web Service Platform", www.wso2.com
