Looks good On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 4:38 PM, Mike Nichols <[email protected]>wrote:
> > Ok I redid the implementation using IServiceBusAware . > > > On Jan 23, 1:00 pm, Mike Nichols <[email protected]> wrote: > > Ah I like that more better :) > > Will do > > > > On Jan 23, 12:58 pm, Ayende Rahien <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > The problem with that is that I don't think that message module is the > right > > > place for this.It has nothing to do with messages. > > > > > I agree about bloat. > > > > > What about creating IBusStartupAware ? > > > > > On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 2:57 PM, Mike Nichols < > [email protected]>wrote: > > > > > > My (maybe mistaken) understanding of IMessageModule was that it > > > > participates in the lifecycle of the bus where I'd put this > > > > specialized kind of app setup. > > > > I was trying to keep from bloating the facility further and it seems > > > > like setting up queues should be part of the bus startup rather than > > > > the configuration of the bus. I can of course move it if you prefer. > > > > > > On Jan 23, 12:40 pm, Ayende Rahien <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Why are you doing that as a message module? It makes more sense to > me to > > > > put > > > > > it directly in the RSBF instead. > > > > > > > On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 2:17 PM, Mike Nichols < > [email protected] > > > > >wrote: > > > > > > > > ok..i just implemented as an IMessageModule on the trunk > > > > > > > > On Jan 23, 6:11 am, Ayende Rahien <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > I think that it is creating _transactional_ queues by default. > > > > > > > The reason that it exists in this manner is quite simple. It > reduce > > > > the > > > > > > > number of things that you need to do to use RSB. You don't have > to go > > > > and > > > > > > > explicitly create the queue. > > > > > > > It just happens. > > > > > > > One less thing to do. > > > > > > > > > I see no problem with moving the responsibility to Rhino > Service Bus > > > > > > > Facility, though. > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 4:46 AM, Mike Nichols < > > > > [email protected] > > > > > > >wrote: > > > > > > > > > > I just committed some fixes to the FlatQueue implementation > in RSB > > > > > > > > 1. A #subscriptions queue is required as a sibling queue > > > > > > > > 2. Initialization of queues in Transport is based on the > strategy > > > > > > > > > > One question though: We are currently only creating > > > > nontransactional > > > > > > > > queues if they don't already exist. SHould we add a config > option > > > > on > > > > > > > > the facility to specify IsTransactional ? Or should the > creation of > > > > a > > > > > > > > queue even be in the Transport...it seems like a SRP > violation to > > > > have > > > > > > > > it in there and should just throw if it can't new() the > queue. > > > > > > > > Queue setup like creation, purging, and so on seems like it > should > > > > be > > > > > > > > the burden of the app code, not RSB. A simple static class > could > > > > > > > > provide these utilities ala PrepareQueues in sample. > > > > > > > > > > mike > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Rhino Tools Dev" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rhino-tools-dev?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
