Ah, no, what I meant was will you a) wait for the R6 spec before releasing Async support for your Remote Service implementation, or will you b) wait for both the Async spec and an updated Remote Services spec before releasing it. I understand that the answer is (a). This all sounds really good. The only missing piece for me now is cycle-supporting serialization. You mentioned earlier that your transport provider is pluggable. If you have some directions on how to plug in a custom (de)serializer while still keeping the JMS provider functionality, that would really make my day :-) Best regards Mike Scott Lewis wrote:
Hi Mike, On 3/11/2014 5:28 PM, Mike Wilson wrote: Thanks Scott, So you plan to release and connect the new Async API to your Remote Services implementation before the RS spec is actually "upgraded"? That sounds interesting. No...we will add the Async API when it's done/specified/approved released in R6. Our existing remote service API makes it easy for us to connect the Async API to any provider implementation (happy to give specifics if you want but probably would be over-sharing here)...and I am playing around with that now...but we won't release anything until the Async API is released. Is your async implementation also able to delegate the async callback stuff to the JMS provider, to save threads? Yes. Scott
_______________________________________________ OSGi Developer Mail List [email protected] https://mail.osgi.org/mailman/listinfo/osgi-dev
