On 7/25/06, Kuppe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I feel that our extension of the TcpTransportServer is specific to our application. We use this extension to allow us to create our own ServerSocketWrapper which performs server side protocol negotiation. We also extend the TcpTransport to allow us to create a client SocketWrapper that performs the client side protocol negotiation. I think this is a reasonable reason to extend the TcpTransportServer, and the opportunity to extend correctly is there, i think it just required a little bit more insight into the intention of the original implementation. Perhaps i could reuse more of the TcpTransportServer also;)
Ah cool, thanks for the heads up. We're always trying to make ActiveMQ easier to reuse and extend; so if there's a way to refactor TcpTransport and TcpTransportServer so its easier to reuse we welcome contributions... http://incubator.apache.org/activemq/contributing.html -- James ------- http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/
