layering (Was) Re: [esb-dev] jca done (I think)

We could inject an implementation of ServiceInvoker that invokes directly on the pipeline. The BIG problem though is EPR publishing. JCA is not bi-directional. Outbound and inflow are two separate things. Don't know enough about outbound JCA yet, but we could possibly have a callback method or object that creates a JCAOutput EPR. I'll read more into it. Bill Kurt T Stam wrote: > Well it'd be nice if we had JCA for listeners too no? It's to bad a > gateway isn't a listener that takes extra params and we'd be done.. > > Bill Burke wrote: >> Kurt, I don't understand what you mean with "can we use JCA within the >> ESB", can u elaborate? I have a qa/junit test that uses the JMS >> adapter as a <jca-gateway>. See the wiki on where it is. >> >> Yes, you can use what I did to write gateways if that's what you're >> asking. >> >> Kurt T Stam wrote: >>> Cool. >>> >>> Hey can we use JCA within the ESB now too (I mean this work was >>> specific >>> to a gateway right?) >>> , or is that still something you're working on? >>> >>> --K >>> >>> Bill Burke wrote: >>>> Kevin Conner wrote: >>>>> Kurt T Stam wrote: >>>>>> 1. So now we can use XA Txs spanning DB and JMS resources? >>>>> We should be able to, the XA transaction should encompass them both. >>>>> >>>>>> 2. I'm guessing we'd still be using the old JmsGateway when >>>>>> running in >>>>>> bootstrapper mode? >>>>> Weston had intended to develop a standalone implementation of JCA >>>>> which >>>>> would have been perfect for the standalone ESB. Not sure what will >>>>> happen to that now. >>>>> >>>>> Using JCA will necessitate the full blown app server or the esb >>>>> profile. >>>>> >>>> As I've said before, the JBoss Embeddable project *already* includes >>>> JCA and can run inside Junit tests, Tomcat standalone, and plain Java >>>> apps. Eventually I'll get around to refactoring it to run in other >>>> application servers. >>>> >>>> The JCA rewrite will continue. Supposedly Adrian was really itching >>>> to get back to it anyways. If he doesn't pick it up, I definately >>>> will. Really the brunt of the JCA rewrite is to pojitize it and remove >>>> any MBean dependencies or at least, make them "aspectized". >>>> >>>> The JCA integration I did with ESB should really be moved to the JCA >>>> project as it is an abstraction for any inflow container. MDB could >>>> be written on top of it. It has a bridge interface that would allow >>>> you to plug in other JCA implementations, well, at least in theory. I >>>> have no idea if any other app server has an SPI or even an API we >>>> could hack into. If we can't do that, we could probably still embed >>>> our own JCA implementation into another application server. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>> 3. How does 'transacted' work? I mean an mdb has: supports, >>>>>> requiresNew, >>>>>> required, none. >>>>> MDB only supports Required and NotSupported transaction types as they >>>>> have no calling context. I would assume that the transacted >>>>> attribute >>>>> would be equivalent. >>>>> >>>> The JCA integration layer I did is really a mini MDB container, so >>>> yes, that's what it means. >>>> >>>> Bill >>>> >