Re black and white looking at your gist, that's specific to Java serialisation, I don't think that should be in the interface like it is maybe a more generic configure(properties) as for other impls they may need other config options (as in Avro would need to configure schema reg url).
Sent from my iPhone > On 2 Jun 2017, at 21:06, Clebert Suconic <[email protected]> wrote: > > What about a mixed approach. > > We make Artemis as a plugin. And you use it as plug on anywhere else. > > I like the plugin approach as it would clean up the code on black and white > list anyways. > > Then the plug in implementation for avro could live on this new Repo. > > If at a later point u need to use a repo that doesn't support the plug in > approach you use the facade doing the proxy ? > > > Perhaps we could talk over IRC next week. I'm taking Monday of. So I would > be available Tuesday. > > > > > On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 3:42 PM Michael André Pearce < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> I'd rather go with something more people are happy with (or at least a >> little more happier about) >> >> I'm not 100% sure if I have fully read the feelings right, but it seems >> Tim is a little more happy with maybe us making some jms extension area >> that we put this and move the connection pool factory to also, as plug-on >> rather than as plug-in. And seems this is not suited for camel to own but >> maybe activemq, but as maybe a sub project rather than a module of >> activemq5, or a module of artemis. >> >> For me this solution does work, and allows it to work for any jms impl, >> e.g. It would be fairly important to be able to use qpid jms client and >> artemis client with it if using components in some places like qpid router, >> meaning you have to use qpid jms. >> >> I agree it would be much better if there was a chance to have it in a >> 2.0.2 jms spec. >> >> Are you against this idea? @clebert? @tim have I understood your feelings >> correctly? >> >> >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >>> On 2 Jun 2017, at 20:29, Clebert Suconic <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> >>> On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 3:22 PM, Michael André Pearce >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> I agree i much the original proposal to make it a plugin interface, but >> would want also buy-in on the qpid jms client also. >>> >>> I'm just proposing one thing at the time. >>> >>> After everything is cleared in JMS terms, we can verify what to do next. >>> >>> >>> If the JSR was still alive.. I would propose this as an addition on the >> JSR. >> > -- > Clebert Suconic
