activemq-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Carl Trieloff <>
Subject Re: NMS
Date Mon, 11 Jun 2007 13:59:55 GMT
James Strachan wrote:
> On 6/11/07, Carl Trieloff <> wrote:
>> Robert Greig wrote:
>> > On 11/06/07, Arnaud Simon <> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Even the ActiveMQ guys cannot agree. As a potential Qpid 
>> implementation
>> >> of NMS would be hosted by their project they should decide whether 
>> this
>> >> is useful to have one and also take responsibility for potential 
>> legal
>> >> aspects.
>> >
>> > OK but this impacts us in the sense that we would be doing the
>> > implementation?
>> >
>> > Surely we should not be putting effort into something where the legal
>> > position is not clear? What are we supposed to say to our users? "Use
>> > this but we can't decide whether it's violating a licence agreement"?
>> >
>> > RG
>> I have not read through all the threads on the topic, but if there is
>> legal doubt about it
>> , it would make sense to explore all other alternatives first.
> The same legal doubt over NMS (i.e. does reading the JMS API taint you
> from ever writing other non-Java messaging stuff) also applies to AMQP
> itself - it could be tainted too; as at least one contributor to the
> AMQP specification has read the JMS specification (myself). There
> could well be others too.
> So I guess both NMS and AMQP need legal clarification on the tainting
> caused by reading the JMS specification.


I don't think the analogy is at all accurate as AMQP has specified NO 
API's to date where as JMS and NMS
 are all about API. Every impl of AMQP today has done its own thing on 
API to date. Personally I am
not comfortable and the replies from the list have not helped. If the 
committers of Qpid want to pursue use
of NMS I will take the time to form my own view on the topic.

Having the Qpid project ask the question is a fine thing to do. For 
example in C++, Python, Ruby etc we
have a non JMS mapped API and there are many other approaches to do 
.NET, The is question on how we should
continue to develop the .NET client for Qpid which could be done with or 
without NMS. nothing wrong in asking the
questions before the project makes the call which way to go with regard 
to NMS.


View raw message