Hi Ken Thanks for bringing this !
I don't think option 2 is actually a good idea, at least today, as it's a change in the current behavior. I would rather prefer option 3 (different interfaces) on 6.x and deprecated AsyncCallback on 7.x trend. Regards JB On Mon, Nov 25, 2024 at 7:24 PM Ken Liao <kenlia...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hey dev community, > > Would like to get your opinion on this. To make ActiveMQ Classic fully > support JMS 2.0/Jakarta Messaging 3.1, it needs to support > CompletionListener interface for specifying callback once the asynchronous > send is completed. Currently, ActiveMQ Classic has its own public interface > AsyncCallback for client applications to specify the callback. However, the > behaviour of AsyncCallback is not JMS 2.0 compliant and it is specific to > ActiveMQ. > > In my opinion, it will be a confusing experience for users because there > are two mechanisms for specifying callbacks and I wonder if there are any > advantages of using AsyncCallback over CompletionListener. Either: > 1. Deprecate AsyncCallback (throw exception) at the release where we > support CompletionListener. > 2. Change AsyncCallback behaviour to align with CompletionListener at that > release. > 3. Keep supporting these two different interfaces/behavior going forward. > > Personally I am advocating for 2 but would like to hear what the community > thinks and check if I am missing something. > > Thanks, > Ken --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@activemq.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@activemq.apache.org For further information, visit: https://activemq.apache.org/contact
