On 6 April 2012 13:31, Robbie Gemmell <[email protected]> wrote:
> Option 1 seems like the only sensible course of action, options 2 and > 3 would just be continuing further down the paths that lead us where > we are now. At the end of this process there should really be less > arbitrary segregation of codepaths and less legacy cruft lying around, > not more of it. > Robbie > +1 ... Option 1) is really the only option -- Rob > > On 5 April 2012 16:34, Rajith Attapattu <[email protected]> wrote: > > Once we get agreement on the destination work, the next step is to > > integrate it into the code base. > > I see the following options. Please feel free to provide your feedback on > > the options provide or even suggest new options. > > I'm quite happy to work with any option the majority feels the best. > > > > 1. Integrate into both 0-8 and 0-10 code paths. > > > > 2. Integrate into 0-10 only. - This would be tricky as there is a fair > bit > > of common code that uses destination stuff. > > > > 3. Have a new implementation of Session, Producer, Consumer etc for 0-10 > > that exclusively uses the new destination impl. > > We could then use AMQConnectionDelegate_0_10 as a point to plug in > this > > new structure when 0-10 is used. > > > > (Note: I'm not advocating a rewrite, rather to reuse as much code as > > possible, and by moving necessary pieces from common code into the > specific > > implementation we could do #2 without being encumbered by common code). > > The flip side is code duplication. > > > > Regards, > > > > Rajith > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >
