RE: [mina] Filter management (was Spring Integration)

[Jose Alberto Fernandez]

Well, I hope you are right.   From: Trustin Lee [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]   2a) Instead, insert ProtocolCodecFilter with your codec factory in your IoHandler.sessionCreated() method. For example: public void sessionCreated( IoSession session ) throws Exception {     session.getFilterChain().addFirst( "codec", new ProtocolCodecFilter( YOUR_CODEC_FACTORY ) ); } This is one place, where the approach I mentioned would make a lot of sense. You are running several protocols using several different handlers. You really do not want to specify on every session the adding of new CodecFilters, for example. You know all sessions will use the same filters and if your filters are stateless, they should be using the same one. It would make a lot of sense to be able to set this things once during bind() and not need to do it on every session creation. I think you can compare examples and find out what has been changed.  The change is trivial IMHO.  Please let me know if it is never trivial.  I'll write some migration guide.  But I can say most protocol doesn't talk longer than 1 hr for migration.    I think you guys need to provide a migration guide as part of the 0.9 stable delivery. I just went to the MINA site and there is no info about all this changes (unless you go and look at the source code) if I where a user of MINA and I see the announcement of 0.9 and go and download it and then I learn I need to port all my code. I sure will be quite disappointed that no one mentioned this in very large letters. It would also be nice if there were some sort of utility classes that would allow one to bridge between the old interfaces and the new ones. My be some proxy classes classes and interfaces can be provided to simplify this.   Yes of course.  Actually I don't know what you exactly mean.  There's no copy.  The IoFilterChain attached to IoSessionManager is shared, but IoFilterChain attached to IoSession is not shared at all.  That's all. Good, that was my understanding too. I guess my suggestion was to make a copy on the bind/connect which are fewer that the number of sessions that will be opened. Clever programming here may allow for the copy only to occur once a chain is modified which will make things much cheaper.   Jose Alberto