Open arinban opened 6 years ago
Comment by arinban Friday Feb 02, 2018 at 08:49 GMT
Original Issue:https://github.com/javaee/glassfish-genericjmsra/issues/6 Raised By:@glassfishrobot Created at:Mon Aug 22 19:19:01 IST 2005 Assigned To:@glassfishrobot
Comment by arinban Friday Feb 02, 2018 at 08:49 GMT
@glassfishrobot Commented on Mon Aug 22 19:19:01 IST 2005 Reported by andrewsmallbone
Comment by arinban Friday Feb 02, 2018 at 08:49 GMT
@glassfishrobot Commented on Sat Aug 27 12:24:34 IST 2005 binod said: Re assigning this issue to Andrew.
Comment by arinban Friday Feb 02, 2018 at 08:50 GMT
@glassfishrobot Commented on Sun Aug 28 15:51:03 IST 2005 @sivakumart said: Andrew,
Suggest adding support for specifying constructor properties in the ActivationSpec. This issue could be solved using the above mechanism. However, wouldn't it be more useful if we could have a generic mechanism for solving such customizations. In one of our earlier discussions while starting the project, one idea was to have a generic factory based implementation to create CF/Admin Objects etc. We could have MoM product-specific factory implementations (classes) [i.e an implementation for Tibco, one for Sonic MQ and so on] that could have their own custom means of creating and initializing these objects. Users could then while configuring the RA choose which MoM-Factory implementation they want to work with and properties specific to that Factory implementation.
Would this approach be useful? Could we consider this as well while fixing this issue?
Issue by arinban Friday Feb 02, 2018 at 08:49 GMT Originally opened as https://github.com/arindam-bandyopadhyay/issue-test/issues/13
Tibcos EMS Queue implementation doesn't support a setDestination method, so a dynamic, named Queue can only be created by passing the name into the constructor. This means they can't be created using an ActivationSpec.
Suggest adding support for specifying constructor properties in the ActivationSpec. This could either be a specific named property or the DestinationProperty could be used to hold constructor properties, for example: ConstructorArg=x.y.z,OtherProp=xxx or assume a no name property is a constructor argument: =x.y.z,OtherProp=xxx multiple args could also be supported ConstructorArg[0]=x.y.z,ConstructorArg[1]=a.b.c,OtherProp=xxx
This would (at minimum) only involve changes in the ObjectBuilderFactory.ClassObjectBuilder.createObject() method and would support all objects created by the ObjectBuilder
Environment
Operating System: All Platform: All
Affected Versions
[current]