Conceptually it is what you put down in the more verbose format. The more compact form is just a convenient way of expressing it in the JNDI props file which is the only config mechanism we support. So in some other config source the more verbose form could be used.
Regards, Rajith On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 3:25 PM, Aidan Skinner <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 3:05 AM, Rajith Attapattu <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I have taken a non URL approach for the destination abstraction. >> The definitions are a bunch of key/value pairs for each component. > > Ok, given that, would it make sense to do: > > pub.link.<id> = key1='value1';key2='value2';key3='value3'...... > > as: > > pub.link.<id>.key1=value1 > pub.link.<id>.key2=value2 > pub.link.<id>.key3=value3 > ... > > It's more verbose, but I think it maps better to how people should > (ideally, IMHO etc) be setting up JNDI as configuration sources in > other sources. It's also easier to use standard tooling with, which is > nice. > > - Aidan > -- > Apache Qpid - Give me convenience or give me death > http://qpid.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation > Project: http://qpid.apache.org > Use/Interact: mailto:[email protected] > > -- Regards, Rajith Attapattu Red Hat http://rajith.2rlabs.com/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation Project: http://qpid.apache.org Use/Interact: mailto:[email protected]
