Rob,
You are right, we won't have the time to squeeze the ability to use
other FIX[0-4] standards in the upcoming release, but it's a good
idea, and we'll try to concentrate on making that possible for the
next dot release.
Aside from replacing all the hard references to quickfix.fix42.*
package for ExecutionReports and other concrete messages, what else
are you finding that you need to do to port to FIX43?
We tried making the OMS as fix-version agnostic as possible, but
couldn't get away from hard references to concrete message classes -
we chose to have type safety instead of dealing with everything as a
generic quickfix.Message.
We'll submit an enhancement request with QuickfixJ itself to see if
it's possible to have a common translation layer for all the concrete
messages, and will try to include multi-version support in the next
release of the OMS.
thanks for the idea, i've created an RFE to reflect it:
http://trac.marketcetera.org/trac.fcgi/ticket/131On 2/5/07, Robert Parrott <
[hidden email]> wrote:
> What's the chance of FIX 4.[0-4] support being incorporated into this
> release, at least in the oms code?
>
> At this point I'm replacing fix42 to fix43 by hand to work with a
> particular counterparty.
>
> This may be too much for a dot release, however.
>
> If you have preliminary code, I'd be interested in fleshing it out.
>
> cheers,
> rob
> > --
--
Toli Kuznets
http://www.marketcetera.com: Open-Source Trading Platform
download.run.trade.
_______________________________________________
m-etc-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.marketcetera.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/m-etc-users
