Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

make it clear that the user needs to deal with NServiceBus messages in addition to native messages #6924

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Jan 15, 2025

Conversation

PhilBastian
Copy link
Contributor

@@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
### Custom envelope unwrapper
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This seems to be the same as the paragraph above or am I not seeing the difference?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

one less sentence in the warning

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I see it now - wouldn't it be the same in both though it we are backporting the change?

@abparticular
Copy link
Contributor

I'm not sure on the structure of the snippet/sample. Shouldn't it be something more like (pseudocode)

return CanDeserialize(body) ? new MessageWrapper() : null

or

try
{
  return new Deserialize(body);
}
catch
{
  return null;
}

I'm concerned about the focus on checking for base64 (an internal implementation detail) rather than making it clear that if the message can't be handled by the custom unwrapper, then null should be returned.

Copy link
Contributor

@abparticular abparticular left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Sorry I didn't mean to approve this PR

@jasontaylordev jasontaylordev self-requested a review January 15, 2025 06:30
@jasontaylordev jasontaylordev merged commit 0f8c77e into master Jan 15, 2025
4 checks passed
@jasontaylordev jasontaylordev deleted the 1005_delayed_retries branch January 15, 2025 06:31
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants