Hi Andreas, On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 4:12 AM, Andreas Veithen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> Hi Senaka, > > Some quick comments: > * I sent some comments in the other thread > (http://markmail.org/message/vcnfattmwvt4jd7i), but I didn't see an > answer yet. Maybe you missed the post? I think we should first > concentrate on that part of the code. Yes, I read that mail, but actually forgot to drop in a reply. Well, there is a necessity to keep the content accessible as a Map, in order to make the process of manipulating it more efficient. An XML representation is an optional thing, which would fit in IF NEEDED. Therefore, I believe that option 1, is not quite fitting. But, I still am doing some research on option 2, perhaps to use it in a slightly modified way. The XML representation would be extracted on-demand (or if the content came in as XML, the Map representation would be extracted on-demand -- this is an optional thing, and is still a thought). > > * MapMessageInputStream is no longer used; is that correct? If yes, > please remove it. It is still used in LogAspect (JMS - Tests), but nowhere else, as I last observed it, will try to get rid of it. > > * Can you try to reduce the amount of duplicate code related to > MapMessages in JMSSender? That would make it more readable. Yes, will do. The most recent commit, just was an intermediate fix rather, that would adopt the approach you took in place of what has been there. > > > Thanks, Senaka
