On 06/22/2012 03:08 PM, Rajith Attapattu wrote:
On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 5:18 AM, Gordon Sim <[email protected]> wrote:
On 06/22/2012 01:38 AM, Rajith Attapattu wrote:
My goals are to,
(1) Bring the Java/JMS client inline with the other clients. We have
increasingly encountered cases where the applications that are used in
a Qpid deployment are written in a multitude of languages. A common
URL format will make things easy, just like the common addressing
syntax.
Only if it *is* the same and if the set of options are the same (or at least
close). Making things look similar on the surface when they are in fact
completely different under the covers is not always an improvement.
(2) Provide an alternative to the connection URL format which is quite
error prone and ugly.
I agree that the connection "URL" format is rather awkward and would welcome
a more intuitive alternative.
Isn't the current C++ and Python syntax a better alternative ( at
least for majority of the use cases) ?
Again, if by 'current C++ and Python syntax' you mean a syntax for
expressing maps, then yes I think that would be a much more intuitive
basis for configuration than cramming things into a "URL" in a
non-standard and non-intuitive way.
Or are you envisioning something different ?
At present I'm just trying to understand what exactly you are proposing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
