Creating (JMS) Destinations automatically for MDBs

[adrian.brock]

WRT: https://jira.jboss.org/jira/browse/JBMETA-110
and https://jira.jboss.org/jira/browse/JBAS-6013

I guess we need some jboss specific annotation to match this metadata
if it doesn't already exist?
Can somebody on the EJB3 team put together the JIRA issues that define
what is required to do this (including the annotation merging).

[emuckenhuber]

added a simple boolean field <create-destination> to the jboss_5_0.xsd.

Is that enough or do you need more ? We can also change the name if you want ;)

[wolfc]

Isn't this just an activation config property?

[adrian.brock]

"wolfc" wrote:
Isn't this just an activation config property?

No, but it could be if the rar supports the feature natively.
This feature is a JBoss value add on if the rar doesn't support it.

i.e. our generic jms rar can't support it because it doesn't know
the api for different jms backends.

Somebody could also write a version of the deployer/bean for WSMQ
using whatever admin api WSMQ provides.
I'm just going to provide the JBoss Messaing version.

All that's required within the EJB3 layer (beyond what has already
been done in the xml) is being able to annotate the
message driven bean to trigger the behaviour with something like:

@org.jboss.ejb3.annotations.CreateDestination
public class MyMDB extends ...

So what needs doing to handle that, i.e. scan the mdb for the annotation and update the
new metadata.

[wolfc]

We need to tackle this on a different approach. I don't want to change the EJB3 ext-api just because someone thinks a new function on top of EJBs.

The annotation itself is an API of the new deployer itself, so is it's meta data. It should result in no change on any EJB code.

[wolfc]

I'm missing the annotation in jboss-metadata.

The MDB doesn't get a dependency on the newly created queue. This might lead to trouble. (I already found out that putting a service.xml with a queue within the EJB jar gives a similar problem.)

Since I still don't want the MDB to know what's going on, maybe a reverse dependency is in order for MC?