Adding new bridges


Tom Doust
 

I just want to throw some thoughts into the air here about simplifying the process of adding new bridges.

 

As things stand, with OM 2.1.1.2,  if I want to run a new middleware bridge I have to add a value to the enum mamaMiddleware

in middleware.h and a case to the switch statement in middleware.c, effectively forcing a new release of OM if anyone else wants to work with the new bridge

 

Further, I’m constrained to the name of my shared lib though the code in mama_loadBridgeWithPathInternal and the stuff in platform.c - openSharedLib

that builds the library name. From a development perspective this makes is difficult to run multiple variants.

 

I don’t see any problem with moving the work that is done by the enum/switch on the middleware name to an external config and also passing the library name as an optional parameter somewhere, again, possibly read from external config.

 

There may be some good reasons for things being the way they are, so I’m interested in any feedback, comments etc, before we (Tick42) consider contributing some enhancements in this area.

 

 

 

TOM DOUST | Head of Consultancy                                                                                                         


TICK42

P: +44 (0) 1628 477444 | M: +44 (0) 7710 479924 | E: tom.doust@... | http://www.tick42.com  


 

 

Join Openmama-dev@lists.openmama.org to automatically receive all group messages.