Gary's recommendation to follow the unit test was explicitly for the situation where you are trying "to achieve a bridge with no advisories - so statically configured"; is that actually what you're looking for? If not, why are you trying to follow it instead of using the dynamicallyIncludedDestinations/dynamicallyExcludedDestinations and bridgeTempDestinations settings referenced earlier in the thread?
Tim On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 8:47 AM, gsaff...@ilstechnology.com < gsaff...@ilstechnology.com> wrote: > I just upgraded from 5.5 to 5.10 and got bit by this one too. What a pain. > I > am glad to see it is still possible to both restrict dynamically included > destinations and still use temp queues however, I do not understand the > unit > test that has been presented as an example of how to do that. > > My questions are: > > 1) *What does "replyQWildcard.getPhysicalName()" return?* (I don't generate > my activemq.xml files via code so I don't know what I should be putting in > the xml file based on that example.) > > 2) I have a hub-and-spoke architecture where the hub connects to the spokes > and the in/out message is produced on the spoke. *How do I modify the > example such that the hub (the broker with the networkConnector) can reply > via the temp queue that is created on the spoke?* > > 3) I don't see any documentation or examples regarding a <tempQueue> > element. *Is it buried somewhere and I'm just not finding it?* I tried > several google searches to no avail. > > Thanks! > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Reply-message-not-forwarded-across-temporary-bridged-destination-tp4688578p4699927.html > Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >
