On Sep 22, 2010, at 5:01 AM, Nicholas Gallardo wrote: > JMS support doesn't currently exist for Wink. Wink, to date, has been purely > HTTP-based. I'm a little confused as to your motivation to go that way > though. > Is it to reduce chattiness (and number of outstanding number of connections) > of > clients/services? Or more to have clients submit longer running jobs and not > leave connections idle?
Really its just that I prefer using JMS, but need to still expose everything as REST for potential web UI muck... that and REST is the sexy thing that the bosses demand. ATM my only consumer is a Java client, but that doesn't mean that I won't get a web2.0 client in the future. Its not a big deal... just wondering. --jason
