[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: XMLBlaster as a JMS implementation
> Basic PtP and Pub/Sub is both finished.
> XmlBlaster is not JMS conforming, and it is not our
> goal to be a JMS implementation.
> I heared from some other users, that they think of
> adding a xmlBlaster - JMS gateway, i don't know if they
> are working on it.
> IMHO, JMS as several drawbacks.
> We want to be simpler and more powerful - which we are :-)
How would adding support for the JMS API be a drawback? It would not
mean you need to remove your powerful, simple API, right?
>From an application developer point of view, it's a lot more
future-proof to adopt a standard API (JMS) than a proprietary one.
[ Kyle Cordes * kyle at kylecordes.com * www.kylecordes.com ]
[ Training and Development Services: Java, Delphi, PHP, ]
[ ASP, ASTA, Web Applications, n-tier systems, etc. ]
[ Delphi developers: Visit the BDE Alternatives Guide ]