[Design of JBoss ESB] - Dead letter service
by kurt.stam＠jboss.com
If things go 'bad' we need a place to send our 'dead message'. We can't assume people have JMS. We really should abstract the protocol people are using; this should be configurable. I think we should have a default dead letter service, people can change it as they wish.
Daniel is saying:
anonymous wrote :
| With regards to the 'dead letter' service, I think the idea was to use the message-store to persist these undeliverable messages, then re-try at a later date. Can we discuss how we would like to do this? The current message-store just writes/reads Messages to the database. The column in the DB has a TYPE (XML or SERIALIZED based on what we currently provide for Message), the Message content itself, and the URI which is a unique key.
|
Mark responds with:
anonymous wrote :
| It would be nice to have this configurable within CBR. So you can set
| up rules to say: DLQ is /dev/null (i.e., just delete), return to
| sender (assuming ReplyTo or From fields set in Message), deposit in
| Message Store and retry later.
|
View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4025107#4025107
Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4025107
19 years, 1 month
[Design of JBoss Build System] - Re: Build System Meeting Agenda Mar 01, 2007
by david.lloyd＠jboss.com
"pgier" wrote : "scott.stark(a)jboss.org" wrote :
| | Why not have a single maven repo under svn where only devs with release tech permission can put out non-snapshot releases? Does svn support that type of filename pattern permissions or is it only path based?
| |
| | Having the repo under svn (not cvs due to refactoring problems) is a good thing for tracking who changed what.
| |
| I'm not sure if SVN could provide that type of filename matching permissions. It doesn't appear to be available without changes to the svn apache modules.
| I agree with you that for now we should leave the release repository under version control, but in the future it may not be necessary.
|
Actually, by using a pre-commit hook you can enforce any arbitrarily complex [write] permission policy you want. Unfortunately there are no hooks (to my knowledge) that can restrict read access.
View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4025094#4025094
Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4025094
19 years, 1 month
[Design of JBoss Build System] - Re: Build System Meeting Agenda Mar 01, 2007
by pgier
"scott.stark(a)jboss.org" wrote : How is the repository selected?
The deployment repository can be selected automatically based on whether you are doing a release (using the release plugin). This week I will create some documentation in the wiki with more specifics about how this will work.
"scott.stark(a)jboss.org" wrote : If I put out a 2.0.0.Beta3 build of the mc to the snapshot repository and link jbossas to it, I don't expect that it will change.
I was thinking that alpha and beta releases would go to the releases repository, and not the snapshot repository. That way they wouldn't change.
"scott.stark(a)jboss.org" wrote :
| Why not have a single maven repo under svn where only devs with release tech permission can put out non-snapshot releases? Does svn support that type of filename pattern permissions or is it only path based?
|
| Having the repo under svn (not cvs due to refactoring problems) is a good thing for tracking who changed what.
|
I'm not sure if SVN could provide that type of filename matching permissions. It doesn't appear to be available without changes to the svn apache modules.
I agree with you that for now we should leave the release repository under version control, but in the future it may not be necessary.
View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4025092#4025092
Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4025092
19 years, 1 month