You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@servicemix.apache.org by Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com> on 2007/10/09 09:23:26 UTC
Re: Basic TCP component
Andrea, I've just downloaded the source zip of the components and it
seems that there is lots of components coming from ServiceMix: are
these differents in some sort ? Bug fixes, enhancements ? If so what
about raising JIRAs and attaching your patches ? I know you have
already done so and iirc i have applied them ...
On 10/9/07, Andrea Zoppello <zo...@tiscali.it> wrote:
> Hi Bruce,
>
> You can take a look at:
>
> http://forge.objectweb.org/projects/spagic
>
> In the project site you could find the source code.
>
> By the way some information the spagic TCP component is based on apache
> mina.
>
>
> Andrea Zoppello
>
>
>
>
> Bruce Snyder ha scritto:
> > On 10/8/07, jpuro <jp...@sterlingtesting.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Yup, that makes sense. But after looking at spagic it seems that they
> >> already use mina in a similar fashion and handle a lot of other requirements
> >> for tcp/ip etc. Take a look at their source code and let me know what you
> >> think. Otherwise I'll just implement my own version on apache mina as I
> >> have seen camel-mina do.
> >>
> >
> > Please provide a URL to the source of the code you're looking at.
> >
> > Bruce
> >
>
>
--
Cheers,
Guillaume Nodet
------------------------
Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
Re: Basic TCP component
Posted by jpuro <jp...@sterlingtesting.com>.
Hmmm. ok, likelyhood of options 2 and 3??? For my company we can use the
lgpl licensed one, but I'd like this to be out of the box for servicemix, at
least a basic version to begin with...
-jeff
gnodet wrote:
>
> AFAIK, the one provided by Spagic is LGPL and unless they plan to
> change its license we can't really use it in ServiceMix. So there are
> 3 possibilities:
> * you don't care about LGPL, so just use it
> * the component is relicensed under AL
> * the component is contributed to ServiceMix (which implies it is
> relicensed)
> * or you start a new one :-(
>
> On 10/9/07, jpuro <jp...@sterlingtesting.com> wrote:
>>
>> So, what to do about a TCP component? :)
>>
>> -jeff
>>
>>
>> gnodet wrote:
>> >
>> > On 10/9/07, Andrea Zoppello <zo...@tiscali.it> wrote:
>> >> Hi Guillaume,
>> >>
>> >> If you take a look at the document "How to cook your spagic" you could
>> >> find all the information, on the patches, enhnacements that we've made
>> >> on servicemix.
>> >>
>> >> Actually spagic is based on smx 3.1.1 codebase.
>> >>
>> >> By the way our approach is to keep the patches that we've done in
>> spagic
>> >> until they're
>> >> taken bu smx codebase.
>> >
>> > Most of the bug you are talking about have been already fixed afaik
>> > (SM-781, SM-924, SM-879). One is still pending in an unknown state
>> > (SM-888). You have raised another one recently about the split
>> > aggregator which has been included too (not released yet). But I
>> > agree some have not been relesed yet :-(
>> >
>> >>
>> >> In future versions of spagic the patches that we've update to JIRA
>> will
>> >> not be there
>> >> anymore, because it will be included directly in smx :-)
>> >
>> > Cool, I think that's the way to go too. Hopefully we will be able to
>> > have shorter release cycles now.
>> >
>> >>
>> >> By the way have you seen my post about the needing for "Merge
>> >> components" in front
>> >> of a Drools or Content Based router??
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Andrea Zoppello
>> >>
>> >> Guillaume Nodet ha scritto:
>> >> > Andrea, I've just downloaded the source zip of the components and it
>> >> > seems that there is lots of components coming from ServiceMix: are
>> >> > these differents in some sort ? Bug fixes, enhancements ? If so
>> what
>> >> > about raising JIRAs and attaching your patches ? I know you have
>> >> > already done so and iirc i have applied them ...
>> >> >
>> >> > On 10/9/07, Andrea Zoppello <zo...@tiscali.it> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> Hi Bruce,
>> >> >>
>> >> >> You can take a look at:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> http://forge.objectweb.org/projects/spagic
>> >> >>
>> >> >> In the project site you could find the source code.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> By the way some information the spagic TCP component is based on
>> >> apache
>> >> >> mina.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Andrea Zoppello
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Bruce Snyder ha scritto:
>> >> >>
>> >> >>> On 10/8/07, jpuro <jp...@sterlingtesting.com> wrote:
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>> Yup, that makes sense. But after looking at spagic it seems that
>> >> they
>> >> >>>> already use mina in a similar fashion and handle a lot of other
>> >> requirements
>> >> >>>> for tcp/ip etc. Take a look at their source code and let me know
>> >> what you
>> >> >>>> think. Otherwise I'll just implement my own version on apache
>> mina
>> >> as I
>> >> >>>> have seen camel-mina do.
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>> Please provide a URL to the source of the code you're looking at.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Bruce
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Cheers,
>> > Guillaume Nodet
>> > ------------------------
>> > Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
>> >
>> >
>>
>> --
>> View this message in context:
>> http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-Basic-TCP-component-tf4592566s12049.html#a13117891
>> Sent from the ServiceMix - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Guillaume Nodet
> ------------------------
> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
>
>
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-Basic-TCP-component-tf4592566s12049.html#a13136109
Sent from the ServiceMix - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: Basic TCP component
Posted by Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com>.
AFAIK, the one provided by Spagic is LGPL and unless they plan to
change its license we can't really use it in ServiceMix. So there are
3 possibilities:
* you don't care about LGPL, so just use it
* the component is relicensed under AL
* the component is contributed to ServiceMix (which implies it is relicensed)
* or you start a new one :-(
On 10/9/07, jpuro <jp...@sterlingtesting.com> wrote:
>
> So, what to do about a TCP component? :)
>
> -jeff
>
>
> gnodet wrote:
> >
> > On 10/9/07, Andrea Zoppello <zo...@tiscali.it> wrote:
> >> Hi Guillaume,
> >>
> >> If you take a look at the document "How to cook your spagic" you could
> >> find all the information, on the patches, enhnacements that we've made
> >> on servicemix.
> >>
> >> Actually spagic is based on smx 3.1.1 codebase.
> >>
> >> By the way our approach is to keep the patches that we've done in spagic
> >> until they're
> >> taken bu smx codebase.
> >
> > Most of the bug you are talking about have been already fixed afaik
> > (SM-781, SM-924, SM-879). One is still pending in an unknown state
> > (SM-888). You have raised another one recently about the split
> > aggregator which has been included too (not released yet). But I
> > agree some have not been relesed yet :-(
> >
> >>
> >> In future versions of spagic the patches that we've update to JIRA will
> >> not be there
> >> anymore, because it will be included directly in smx :-)
> >
> > Cool, I think that's the way to go too. Hopefully we will be able to
> > have shorter release cycles now.
> >
> >>
> >> By the way have you seen my post about the needing for "Merge
> >> components" in front
> >> of a Drools or Content Based router??
> >>
> >>
> >> Andrea Zoppello
> >>
> >> Guillaume Nodet ha scritto:
> >> > Andrea, I've just downloaded the source zip of the components and it
> >> > seems that there is lots of components coming from ServiceMix: are
> >> > these differents in some sort ? Bug fixes, enhancements ? If so what
> >> > about raising JIRAs and attaching your patches ? I know you have
> >> > already done so and iirc i have applied them ...
> >> >
> >> > On 10/9/07, Andrea Zoppello <zo...@tiscali.it> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Hi Bruce,
> >> >>
> >> >> You can take a look at:
> >> >>
> >> >> http://forge.objectweb.org/projects/spagic
> >> >>
> >> >> In the project site you could find the source code.
> >> >>
> >> >> By the way some information the spagic TCP component is based on
> >> apache
> >> >> mina.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Andrea Zoppello
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Bruce Snyder ha scritto:
> >> >>
> >> >>> On 10/8/07, jpuro <jp...@sterlingtesting.com> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>> Yup, that makes sense. But after looking at spagic it seems that
> >> they
> >> >>>> already use mina in a similar fashion and handle a lot of other
> >> requirements
> >> >>>> for tcp/ip etc. Take a look at their source code and let me know
> >> what you
> >> >>>> think. Otherwise I'll just implement my own version on apache mina
> >> as I
> >> >>>> have seen camel-mina do.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>> Please provide a URL to the source of the code you're looking at.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Bruce
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Cheers,
> > Guillaume Nodet
> > ------------------------
> > Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
> >
> >
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-Basic-TCP-component-tf4592566s12049.html#a13117891
> Sent from the ServiceMix - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>
--
Cheers,
Guillaume Nodet
------------------------
Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
Re: Basic TCP component
Posted by jpuro <jp...@sterlingtesting.com>.
This approach would work fine. I would also like something to be included
out of the box in ServiceMix.
Thanks,
-jeff
Andrea Zoppello-2 wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I think servicemix team is looking the code of spagic tcp-ip component.
>
> By the way i forget to say that if you want you can take the spagic
> tcp-ip component alone
> and install in a fresh servicemix.
>
> What's the problem with this approach?
>
> Andrea
> puro ha scritto:
>> So, what to do about a TCP component? :)
>>
>> -jeff
>>
>>
>> gnodet wrote:
>>
>>> On 10/9/07, Andrea Zoppello <zo...@tiscali.it> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Guillaume,
>>>>
>>>> If you take a look at the document "How to cook your spagic" you could
>>>> find all the information, on the patches, enhnacements that we've made
>>>> on servicemix.
>>>>
>>>> Actually spagic is based on smx 3.1.1 codebase.
>>>>
>>>> By the way our approach is to keep the patches that we've done in
>>>> spagic
>>>> until they're
>>>> taken bu smx codebase.
>>>>
>>> Most of the bug you are talking about have been already fixed afaik
>>> (SM-781, SM-924, SM-879). One is still pending in an unknown state
>>> (SM-888). You have raised another one recently about the split
>>> aggregator which has been included too (not released yet). But I
>>> agree some have not been relesed yet :-(
>>>
>>>
>>>> In future versions of spagic the patches that we've update to JIRA will
>>>> not be there
>>>> anymore, because it will be included directly in smx :-)
>>>>
>>> Cool, I think that's the way to go too. Hopefully we will be able to
>>> have shorter release cycles now.
>>>
>>>
>>>> By the way have you seen my post about the needing for "Merge
>>>> components" in front
>>>> of a Drools or Content Based router??
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Andrea Zoppello
>>>>
>>>> Guillaume Nodet ha scritto:
>>>>
>>>>> Andrea, I've just downloaded the source zip of the components and it
>>>>> seems that there is lots of components coming from ServiceMix: are
>>>>> these differents in some sort ? Bug fixes, enhancements ? If so what
>>>>> about raising JIRAs and attaching your patches ? I know you have
>>>>> already done so and iirc i have applied them ...
>>>>>
>>>>> On 10/9/07, Andrea Zoppello <zo...@tiscali.it> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Bruce,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You can take a look at:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://forge.objectweb.org/projects/spagic
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In the project site you could find the source code.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> By the way some information the spagic TCP component is based on
>>>>>>
>>>> apache
>>>>
>>>>>> mina.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Andrea Zoppello
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Bruce Snyder ha scritto:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 10/8/07, jpuro <jp...@sterlingtesting.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Yup, that makes sense. But after looking at spagic it seems that
>>>>>>>>
>>>> they
>>>>
>>>>>>>> already use mina in a similar fashion and handle a lot of other
>>>>>>>>
>>>> requirements
>>>>
>>>>>>>> for tcp/ip etc. Take a look at their source code and let me know
>>>>>>>>
>>>> what you
>>>>
>>>>>>>> think. Otherwise I'll just implement my own version on apache mina
>>>>>>>>
>>>> as I
>>>>
>>>>>>>> have seen camel-mina do.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Please provide a URL to the source of the code you're looking at.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Bruce
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>> --
>>> Cheers,
>>> Guillaume Nodet
>>> ------------------------
>>> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-Basic-TCP-component-tf4592566s12049.html#a13119876
Sent from the ServiceMix - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: Basic TCP component
Posted by Andrea Zoppello <zo...@tiscali.it>.
Hi,
I think servicemix team is looking the code of spagic tcp-ip component.
By the way i forget to say that if you want you can take the spagic
tcp-ip component alone
and install in a fresh servicemix.
What's the problem with this approach?
Andrea
puro ha scritto:
> So, what to do about a TCP component? :)
>
> -jeff
>
>
> gnodet wrote:
>
>> On 10/9/07, Andrea Zoppello <zo...@tiscali.it> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Guillaume,
>>>
>>> If you take a look at the document "How to cook your spagic" you could
>>> find all the information, on the patches, enhnacements that we've made
>>> on servicemix.
>>>
>>> Actually spagic is based on smx 3.1.1 codebase.
>>>
>>> By the way our approach is to keep the patches that we've done in spagic
>>> until they're
>>> taken bu smx codebase.
>>>
>> Most of the bug you are talking about have been already fixed afaik
>> (SM-781, SM-924, SM-879). One is still pending in an unknown state
>> (SM-888). You have raised another one recently about the split
>> aggregator which has been included too (not released yet). But I
>> agree some have not been relesed yet :-(
>>
>>
>>> In future versions of spagic the patches that we've update to JIRA will
>>> not be there
>>> anymore, because it will be included directly in smx :-)
>>>
>> Cool, I think that's the way to go too. Hopefully we will be able to
>> have shorter release cycles now.
>>
>>
>>> By the way have you seen my post about the needing for "Merge
>>> components" in front
>>> of a Drools or Content Based router??
>>>
>>>
>>> Andrea Zoppello
>>>
>>> Guillaume Nodet ha scritto:
>>>
>>>> Andrea, I've just downloaded the source zip of the components and it
>>>> seems that there is lots of components coming from ServiceMix: are
>>>> these differents in some sort ? Bug fixes, enhancements ? If so what
>>>> about raising JIRAs and attaching your patches ? I know you have
>>>> already done so and iirc i have applied them ...
>>>>
>>>> On 10/9/07, Andrea Zoppello <zo...@tiscali.it> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Bruce,
>>>>>
>>>>> You can take a look at:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://forge.objectweb.org/projects/spagic
>>>>>
>>>>> In the project site you could find the source code.
>>>>>
>>>>> By the way some information the spagic TCP component is based on
>>>>>
>>> apache
>>>
>>>>> mina.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Andrea Zoppello
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Bruce Snyder ha scritto:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 10/8/07, jpuro <jp...@sterlingtesting.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yup, that makes sense. But after looking at spagic it seems that
>>>>>>>
>>> they
>>>
>>>>>>> already use mina in a similar fashion and handle a lot of other
>>>>>>>
>>> requirements
>>>
>>>>>>> for tcp/ip etc. Take a look at their source code and let me know
>>>>>>>
>>> what you
>>>
>>>>>>> think. Otherwise I'll just implement my own version on apache mina
>>>>>>>
>>> as I
>>>
>>>>>>> have seen camel-mina do.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please provide a URL to the source of the code you're looking at.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Bruce
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>> --
>> Cheers,
>> Guillaume Nodet
>> ------------------------
>> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
>>
>>
>>
>
>
RE: Basic TCP component
Posted by Hofri Yehuda <Ye...@comverse.com>.
Et voila:
import org.apache.commons.httpclient.*;
import org.apache.commons.httpclient.methods.PostMethod;
import org.apache.servicemix.MessageExchangeListener;
import org.apache.servicemix.components.http.HttpClientMarshaler;
import org.apache.servicemix.components.util.ComponentSupport;
import org.apache.servicemix.jbi.jaxp.StringSource;
import org.apache.servicemix.jbi.jaxp.SourceTransformer;
import org.w3c.dom.Document;
import javax.jbi.JBIException;
import javax.jbi.messaging.*;
import javax.xml.namespace.QName;
public class HttpClientBC extends ComponentSupport implements
MessageExchangeListener {
private SourceTransformer _transformer;
protected HttpClientMarshaler marshaler = new HttpClientMarshaler();
protected MultiThreadedHttpConnectionManager connectionManager = new
MultiThreadedHttpConnectionManager();
protected HttpClient httpClient = new HttpClient(connectionManager);
protected HostConfiguration hostConfiguration = new
HostConfiguration();
protected String url;
public void stop() throws JBIException {
super.stop();
connectionManager.shutdown();
}
public HttpClientBC() {
}
public void onMessageExchange(MessageExchange messageExchange)
throws MessagingException {
InOut inOut = (InOut) messageExchange;
if (inOut.getStatus() == ExchangeStatus.DONE) {
return;
} else if (inOut.getStatus() == ExchangeStatus.ERROR) {
return;
}
try {
NormalizedMessage inMsg = inOut.getInMessage();
Document doc = (Document)
_transformer.toDOMNode(inMsg.getContent());
... Do something with the message ?!
boolean httpResponse = sendHttpReq();
..... Do something with the response?!
NormalizedMessage answer = inOut.createMessage();
answer.setContent(....);
answer(inOut, answer);
} catch (Exception e) {
throw new MessagingException(e);
}
}
private boolean sendHttpReq(String id) {
PostMethod method = new PostMethod(url);
try {
method.addParameter("id", id);
int response = httpClient.executeMethod(hostConfiguration,
method);
if (response != HttpStatus.SC_OK && response !=
HttpStatus.SC_ACCEPTED) {
return false;
}
}
catch (Exception e) {
return false;
}
finally {
method.releaseConnection();
}
return true;
}
public String getUrl() {
return url;
}
public void setUrl(String url) {
this.url = url;
}
}
-----Original Message-----
From: jpuro [mailto:jpuro@sterlingtesting.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2007 5:33 PM
To: servicemix-dev@geronimo.apache.org
Subject: Re: Basic TCP component
So, what to do about a TCP component? :)
-jeff
gnodet wrote:
>
> On 10/9/07, Andrea Zoppello <zo...@tiscali.it> wrote:
>> Hi Guillaume,
>>
>> If you take a look at the document "How to cook your spagic" you
>> could find all the information, on the patches, enhnacements that
>> we've made on servicemix.
>>
>> Actually spagic is based on smx 3.1.1 codebase.
>>
>> By the way our approach is to keep the patches that we've done in
>> spagic until they're taken bu smx codebase.
>
> Most of the bug you are talking about have been already fixed afaik
> (SM-781, SM-924, SM-879). One is still pending in an unknown state
> (SM-888). You have raised another one recently about the split
> aggregator which has been included too (not released yet). But I
> agree some have not been relesed yet :-(
>
>>
>> In future versions of spagic the patches that we've update to JIRA
>> will not be there anymore, because it will be included directly in
>> smx :-)
>
> Cool, I think that's the way to go too. Hopefully we will be able to
> have shorter release cycles now.
>
>>
>> By the way have you seen my post about the needing for "Merge
>> components" in front of a Drools or Content Based router??
>>
>>
>> Andrea Zoppello
>>
>> Guillaume Nodet ha scritto:
>> > Andrea, I've just downloaded the source zip of the components and
>> > it seems that there is lots of components coming from ServiceMix:
>> > are these differents in some sort ? Bug fixes, enhancements ? If
>> > so what about raising JIRAs and attaching your patches ? I know you
>> > have already done so and iirc i have applied them ...
>> >
>> > On 10/9/07, Andrea Zoppello <zo...@tiscali.it> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hi Bruce,
>> >>
>> >> You can take a look at:
>> >>
>> >> http://forge.objectweb.org/projects/spagic
>> >>
>> >> In the project site you could find the source code.
>> >>
>> >> By the way some information the spagic TCP component is based on
>> apache
>> >> mina.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Andrea Zoppello
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Bruce Snyder ha scritto:
>> >>
>> >>> On 10/8/07, jpuro <jp...@sterlingtesting.com> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>> Yup, that makes sense. But after looking at spagic it seems
>> >>>> that
>> they
>> >>>> already use mina in a similar fashion and handle a lot of other
>> requirements
>> >>>> for tcp/ip etc. Take a look at their source code and let me
>> >>>> know
>> what you
>> >>>> think. Otherwise I'll just implement my own version on apache
>> >>>> mina
>> as I
>> >>>> have seen camel-mina do.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>> Please provide a URL to the source of the code you're looking at.
>> >>>
>> >>> Bruce
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Guillaume Nodet
> ------------------------
> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
>
>
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-Basic-TCP-component-tf4592566s12049.html#a13
117891
Sent from the ServiceMix - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: Basic TCP component
Posted by jpuro <jp...@sterlingtesting.com>.
So, what to do about a TCP component? :)
-jeff
gnodet wrote:
>
> On 10/9/07, Andrea Zoppello <zo...@tiscali.it> wrote:
>> Hi Guillaume,
>>
>> If you take a look at the document "How to cook your spagic" you could
>> find all the information, on the patches, enhnacements that we've made
>> on servicemix.
>>
>> Actually spagic is based on smx 3.1.1 codebase.
>>
>> By the way our approach is to keep the patches that we've done in spagic
>> until they're
>> taken bu smx codebase.
>
> Most of the bug you are talking about have been already fixed afaik
> (SM-781, SM-924, SM-879). One is still pending in an unknown state
> (SM-888). You have raised another one recently about the split
> aggregator which has been included too (not released yet). But I
> agree some have not been relesed yet :-(
>
>>
>> In future versions of spagic the patches that we've update to JIRA will
>> not be there
>> anymore, because it will be included directly in smx :-)
>
> Cool, I think that's the way to go too. Hopefully we will be able to
> have shorter release cycles now.
>
>>
>> By the way have you seen my post about the needing for "Merge
>> components" in front
>> of a Drools or Content Based router??
>>
>>
>> Andrea Zoppello
>>
>> Guillaume Nodet ha scritto:
>> > Andrea, I've just downloaded the source zip of the components and it
>> > seems that there is lots of components coming from ServiceMix: are
>> > these differents in some sort ? Bug fixes, enhancements ? If so what
>> > about raising JIRAs and attaching your patches ? I know you have
>> > already done so and iirc i have applied them ...
>> >
>> > On 10/9/07, Andrea Zoppello <zo...@tiscali.it> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hi Bruce,
>> >>
>> >> You can take a look at:
>> >>
>> >> http://forge.objectweb.org/projects/spagic
>> >>
>> >> In the project site you could find the source code.
>> >>
>> >> By the way some information the spagic TCP component is based on
>> apache
>> >> mina.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Andrea Zoppello
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Bruce Snyder ha scritto:
>> >>
>> >>> On 10/8/07, jpuro <jp...@sterlingtesting.com> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>> Yup, that makes sense. But after looking at spagic it seems that
>> they
>> >>>> already use mina in a similar fashion and handle a lot of other
>> requirements
>> >>>> for tcp/ip etc. Take a look at their source code and let me know
>> what you
>> >>>> think. Otherwise I'll just implement my own version on apache mina
>> as I
>> >>>> have seen camel-mina do.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>> Please provide a URL to the source of the code you're looking at.
>> >>>
>> >>> Bruce
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Guillaume Nodet
> ------------------------
> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
>
>
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-Basic-TCP-component-tf4592566s12049.html#a13117891
Sent from the ServiceMix - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: Basic TCP component
Posted by Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com>.
On 10/9/07, Andrea Zoppello <zo...@tiscali.it> wrote:
> Hi Guillaume,
>
> If you take a look at the document "How to cook your spagic" you could
> find all the information, on the patches, enhnacements that we've made
> on servicemix.
>
> Actually spagic is based on smx 3.1.1 codebase.
>
> By the way our approach is to keep the patches that we've done in spagic
> until they're
> taken bu smx codebase.
Most of the bug you are talking about have been already fixed afaik
(SM-781, SM-924, SM-879). One is still pending in an unknown state
(SM-888). You have raised another one recently about the split
aggregator which has been included too (not released yet). But I
agree some have not been relesed yet :-(
>
> In future versions of spagic the patches that we've update to JIRA will
> not be there
> anymore, because it will be included directly in smx :-)
Cool, I think that's the way to go too. Hopefully we will be able to
have shorter release cycles now.
>
> By the way have you seen my post about the needing for "Merge
> components" in front
> of a Drools or Content Based router??
>
>
> Andrea Zoppello
>
> Guillaume Nodet ha scritto:
> > Andrea, I've just downloaded the source zip of the components and it
> > seems that there is lots of components coming from ServiceMix: are
> > these differents in some sort ? Bug fixes, enhancements ? If so what
> > about raising JIRAs and attaching your patches ? I know you have
> > already done so and iirc i have applied them ...
> >
> > On 10/9/07, Andrea Zoppello <zo...@tiscali.it> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Bruce,
> >>
> >> You can take a look at:
> >>
> >> http://forge.objectweb.org/projects/spagic
> >>
> >> In the project site you could find the source code.
> >>
> >> By the way some information the spagic TCP component is based on apache
> >> mina.
> >>
> >>
> >> Andrea Zoppello
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Bruce Snyder ha scritto:
> >>
> >>> On 10/8/07, jpuro <jp...@sterlingtesting.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> Yup, that makes sense. But after looking at spagic it seems that they
> >>>> already use mina in a similar fashion and handle a lot of other requirements
> >>>> for tcp/ip etc. Take a look at their source code and let me know what you
> >>>> think. Otherwise I'll just implement my own version on apache mina as I
> >>>> have seen camel-mina do.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> Please provide a URL to the source of the code you're looking at.
> >>>
> >>> Bruce
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>
>
--
Cheers,
Guillaume Nodet
------------------------
Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
Re: Basic TCP component
Posted by Andrea Zoppello <zo...@tiscali.it>.
Hi Guillaume,
If you take a look at the document "How to cook your spagic" you could
find all the information, on the patches, enhnacements that we've made
on servicemix.
Actually spagic is based on smx 3.1.1 codebase.
By the way our approach is to keep the patches that we've done in spagic
until they're
taken bu smx codebase.
In future versions of spagic the patches that we've update to JIRA will
not be there
anymore, because it will be included directly in smx :-)
By the way have you seen my post about the needing for "Merge
components" in front
of a Drools or Content Based router??
Andrea Zoppello
Guillaume Nodet ha scritto:
> Andrea, I've just downloaded the source zip of the components and it
> seems that there is lots of components coming from ServiceMix: are
> these differents in some sort ? Bug fixes, enhancements ? If so what
> about raising JIRAs and attaching your patches ? I know you have
> already done so and iirc i have applied them ...
>
> On 10/9/07, Andrea Zoppello <zo...@tiscali.it> wrote:
>
>> Hi Bruce,
>>
>> You can take a look at:
>>
>> http://forge.objectweb.org/projects/spagic
>>
>> In the project site you could find the source code.
>>
>> By the way some information the spagic TCP component is based on apache
>> mina.
>>
>>
>> Andrea Zoppello
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Bruce Snyder ha scritto:
>>
>>> On 10/8/07, jpuro <jp...@sterlingtesting.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Yup, that makes sense. But after looking at spagic it seems that they
>>>> already use mina in a similar fashion and handle a lot of other requirements
>>>> for tcp/ip etc. Take a look at their source code and let me know what you
>>>> think. Otherwise I'll just implement my own version on apache mina as I
>>>> have seen camel-mina do.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Please provide a URL to the source of the code you're looking at.
>>>
>>> Bruce
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>