RE: [sca-bindings] ISSUE 5: JMS bindingType and atLeastOne intent overlaps with setting JMSDeliveryMode

["Michael Rowley" <mrowley@bea.com>]

I think this is a great issue.

I believe that the spec should say that if there is a conflict between a
required intent and the semantics associated with a binding
configuration, then it should be a deployment error.  In the case of the
JMS specification, specific potential conflicts, such as the one
described here, should be defined.

Michael

-----Original Message-----
From: Eric Johnson [mailto:eric@tibco.com] 
Sent: Friday, October 05, 2007 12:36 PM
To: sca-bindings@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [sca-bindings] ISSUE 5: JMS bindingType and atLeastOne intent
overlaps with setting JMSDeliveryMode

Logged as http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BINDINGS-5

Peshev, Peter wrote:
> TARGET:
> JMS Binding Specification Version 1.1, Working Draft  25 September
2007
>
>
> DESCRIPTION:
>
> The current bindingType of the jms is defined as :
>
> <bindingType type="binding.jms" alwaysProvides="jms"
> mayProvide="atLeastOnce atMostOnce ordered conversation"/>
>
> Not being at all policy expert and under the assumption that
> "mayProvide" is supposed to indicate - ("in some scenarios when the
> binding is used, this may be  provided, the assembler by supplying
> intents can influence the runtime behavior of the binding"), here is
the
> question :
>
> The semantics of atLeastOnce is actually having persistent messages
over
> a queue, and persistent messages + durable subscriptions over topic. 
> If that can be configured by intents by the assembler, doesn't it
> overlap with the setting of JMSDeliveryMode in the schema of the JMS
> binding ? Which one wins in case of conflict ?
>
>
> PROPOSED SOLUTION
>  Drop JMSDeliveryMode from the schema
>
>
>
>