activemq-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jean-Baptiste Onofré ...@nanthrax.net>
Subject Re: Possible HornetQ donation to ActiveMQ
Date Fri, 10 Oct 2014 14:25:52 GMT
+1 for separate repo. It makes sense.

Regards
JB


-------- Original message --------
From: Clebert Suconic <clebert.suconic@gmail.com> 
Date:10/10/2014  16:20  (GMT+01:00) 
To: dev@activemq.apache.org 
Cc:  
Subject: Re: Possible HornetQ donation to ActiveMQ 

I'm +1 for a separate repo as long as it's git... we can merge the
repositories later if you decide so with a simple git push command.

On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 10:16 AM, Hadrian Zbarcea <hzbarcea@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Do we want a separate repository (my preference) or a branch in the
> current one?
> For the former case, I think infra@ needs to create the repo, then we
> could import it.
>
> Can we reach a lazy consensus, do we need/want a formal vote on this?
> Hadrian
>
>
> On 10/10/2014 10:04 AM, Clebert Suconic wrote:
>
>> How to bootstrap this.. who will make the initial import?
>>
>>  From my understanding we need the repository created before we can have
>> access for it.
>>
>> We are moving our attention towards the new repository gradually. Having
>> it
>> created will help us speed up the process.
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 5:29 AM, Dejan Bosanac <dejan@nighttale.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>  +1 for activemq6 as well.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> --
>>> Dejan Bosanac
>>> ----------------------
>>> Red Hat, Inc.
>>> dbosanac@redhat.com
>>> Twitter: @dejanb
>>> Blog: http://sensatic.net
>>> ActiveMQ in Action: http://www.manning.com/snyder/
>>>
>>> On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 3:12 PM, Clebert Suconic <
>>> clebert.suconic@gmail.com
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>  +1
>>>>
>>>> I like the activemq6 idea better too
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 9:05 AM, Hadrian Zbarcea <hzbarcea@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>  activemq-6 sounds good. It's also consistent with other things that
>>>>> happened the past (like the transition from smx 3 to 4).
>>>>>
>>>>> I am not sure if a branch is better or a separate repo. Since we're
>>>>> already on git, my preference would be the latter.
>>>>>
>>>>> Hadrian
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 10/07/2014 04:59 AM, Richard Kettelerij wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>  Or morph HornetQ (and parts of Apollo) into a new branch and call it
>>>>>> ActiveMQ 6 right away. Just my 0.02ct
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 9:14 PM, Hiram Chirino <hiram@hiramchirino.com
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   Well, we can put it in a new repo/jira.  What should we call it?
>>>>>> Keep
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> it hornetq?  Is the hornetq brand also being donated to the ASF?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 8:56 AM, Hadrian Zbarcea <hzbarcea@gmail.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  I gave this quite a bit of thought. I suspect using the same
code
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> name
>>>
>>>> (apollo) would create a lot of undesired confusion. First it'd be
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> hard
>>>
>>>> to
>>>>>>>> differentiate between the issue/bug reports. Which "apollo"
does it
>>>>>>>> refer
>>>>>>>> to? Second, even more dangerous, the word will go out that
apollo is
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> no
>>>>
>>>>> longer maintained with potentially negative consequences for
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> hornet's
>>>
>>>> adoption. More I think about it, stronger I feel against (re)using
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> the
>>>
>>>> apollo codename.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Just my $0.02,
>>>>>>>> Hadrian
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 10/03/2014 01:56 PM, Hiram Chirino wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  Yeah that will work.  Perhaps it would be easiest to import
the
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> code
>>>
>>>> into a branch in the apollo git branch.  That way we can continue
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> to
>>>
>>>> use apollo codename as the ActiveMQ 'next gen' strategy.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 10:18 AM, Clebert Suconic
>>>>>>>>> <clebert.suconic@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>  Can't we import the repo as is, and cleanup whatever
dependencies
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> we
>>>
>>>> have
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> before a release? There will be a lot of work anyways on
making the
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> integration?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Some of these things are external dependencies through
maven. We
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> can
>>>
>>>> just
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> clean up anything we have there that already have apache
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> equivalents.
>>>
>>>> (e.g.
>>>>>>>>>> the jms API and other things like that).
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 9:52 AM, Gary Tully <gary.tully@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> the vote is complete[1], I think we can move forward with
the ip
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> clearance
>>>>>>>>>>> work.
>>>>>>>>>>> The best folks to weed out the third party deps
from the grant
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> are
>>>
>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>> HQ
>>>>>>>>>>> guys
>>>>>>>>>>> maybe it is best to sort out the commit rights
so we have
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  knowledgeable
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> help with the cleanup.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> [1]
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>   http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/activemq-dev/
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 201409.mbox/%3CCAH+vQmPNDAF4=HCoFuh0w6vNU+9vBHc24Dh9_HXnvm=
>>>>>>> 4aqkb3w@mail.gmail.com%3E
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  On 24 September 2014 15:28, Clebert Suconic <
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> clebert.suconic@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>   +1
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I knew we would have to adapt our dependencies..that
will be
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> part
>>>
>>>> of
>>>>
>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>> work after acceptance and before releasing.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 10:01 AM, Hiram Chirino
>>>>>>>>>>>> <hiram@hiramchirino.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>   That sounds good to me.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 7:08 AM, Gary
Tully <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> gary.tully@gmail.com>
>>>>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>  I think we should complete the 'Copyright'
section of the ip
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> clearance[1], run a vote to accept
the grant and initial
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> committers
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and then do the surgery to remove
the LPGL deps before
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> completing
>>>>
>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> 'Verify distribution rights' section.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> [1] http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/hornetq.html
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 24 September 2014 11:54, Gary
Tully <gary.tully@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I see #1 and #2 are complete.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> on #3
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - there are a bunch of examples
and documentation that do not
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> apache license header, but this is covered
in the code grant.
>>>>>>>>>>>> We
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> can
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> add licenses as appropriate before a
release.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>     -- otherwise we are in the clear.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on #4
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     - There is an issue with
jee api jars (jms, jta, ejb etc)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from
>>>>
>>>>> jboss
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> under CDDL or GPL - we will need to replace
those with the
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> geronimo
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> counterparts
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>     - The jee resource adapter (.rar) implements a bunch
of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jboss
>>>>
>>>>> extension points from ironjacamar-core-api, jboss-jca-api and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jboss-transaction-spi - all LGPL
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     -- We will need to make a
functional version without
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> those
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  extension
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> points. The wildfly specifics will have
to live outside apache.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> - there is a hard dependency on jboss-logging-spi
(LGPL)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- This will require some major
surgery to extract the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> logging
>>>
>>>> into
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> plugin and use possibly slf4j by default. This will touch
most
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> every
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> file.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> - there is a twitter4j dependency under license[1] that
we
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can
>>>
>>>> drop
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> if
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> necessary.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> In summary, before any of the contributed
code is released we
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> need to address these dependencies
but they need not hinder a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  grant
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> acceptance.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Gary.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [1]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    https://github.com/hornetq/hornetq/blob/master/
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> distribution/hornetq/src/main/resources/licenses/LICENSE_
>>> twitter4j.txt
>>>
>>>> On 10 July 2014 16:53, Hiram Chirino <hiram@hiramchirino.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Clebert ,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> This is a far as I've been able to get
with the IP clearance
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  form:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/public/trunk/
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> content/ip-clearance/hornetq.xml
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  I assumed that what you guys want to donate is the code that
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> currently
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> exists on github master (commit
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 90d43fbc158a0e6e3028c7179dbcf984757b88fb).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Things we still need to do:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Get Red Hat to file a
CCLA with Schedule B filled out
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Get a list of your active
committers and make sure they
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have
>>>>
>>>>> CLAs
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> filed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3) "Check and make sure that for all
items included with the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> distribution that is not under
the Apache license, we have
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>
>>>> right
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to combine with Apache-licensed code
and redistribute"
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4) Check and make sure that all items
depended upon by the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  project
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> covered by one or more of the approved licenses.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 5) Run a VOTE thread to accept the code
donation.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I encourage the rest of the
ActiveMQ PMC members to help
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> check
>>>
>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> double check items #3 and #4 before
doing #5.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 10:58
AM, Hiram Chirino <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  hiram@hiramchirino.com>
wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'll start looking into filling out
the ip-clearance from.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 10:53
AM, Gary Tully <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  gary.tully@gmail.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hi Clebert,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the hornetq specJMS numbers are
very impressive so from my
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  perspective
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we would love to have the
code base.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We can then evaluate how best
to combine the relative
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> strengths
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Apollo and HornetQ for the
next gen ActiveMQ.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please start the process outlined at
[1] and we can look
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> at
>>>
>>>> doing
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> an
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> import.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>  [1] http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 8 July 2014 15:37,
Hiram Chirino <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hiram@hiramchirino.com
>>>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Clebert,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That sounds very interesting!  Bringing
the HornetQ
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> community
>>>>
>>>>> into
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ActiveMQ would be exciting
for me.  We could collaborate
>>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> bring
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> together the best features
of ActiveMQ, Apollo and HornetQ
>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> create
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> an amazing next generation
messaging system AND grow our
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> developer
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> community at the same
time.  Lots of folks have been
>>>>>>>>>>>> asking me
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> when
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will ActiveMQ get JMS
2.0 support, so the fact that HornetQ
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> has
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> JMS
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 2.0 support already is big plus in my book!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I was building up the Apollo codebase
to be that next
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  generation
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> messaging backbone for
ActiveMQ, but perhaps because it's
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> mostly
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> implemented using Scala,
not too many developers got
>>>>>>>> involved
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that's a bit of a problem
since the 'Apache Way' of
>>>>>>>>>>>> building
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> projects
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is more about community
than code.  I have been pondering
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> porting
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Apollo to be just plain
Java based. Since HornetQ is Java
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> based
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> and has a similar fully async threading architecture
like
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Apollo,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> perhaps this donation
will save me lots of work.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> :)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jul 8,
2014 at 10:31 AM, Clebert Suconic
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <clebert.suconic@gmail.com>
wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  Hi all,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> My name is
Clebert Suconic, I'm the project lead for the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  HornetQ
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> JMS broker
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> (http://hornetq.jboss.org/). The HornetQ
team is currently
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> planning
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>  phase for the next release of the broker
and we've been
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thinking
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> about
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> whether it would make sense for us to
collaborate more
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> closely
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with the
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ActiveMQ community.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There is a lot of overlap in
the capabilities of the two
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  brokers
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> today and
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> it strikes us that it would be beneficial
to both communities
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> us to join
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> forces to build one truly great JMS broker
rather than spend
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> our
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> time
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> duplicating efforts on both brokers.
ActiveMQ has a great
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> community of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> developers and users
and it'd be great to be able to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consolidate
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> our work
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> there.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> My understanding is that the
Apollo sub-project aimed to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  provide
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>  basis for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>  the next generation of ActiveMQ, addressing
some of the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> current
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> limitations.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Perhaps HornetQ could be an alternative. HornetQ has
some
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> performance
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> and scalability numbers as well as support for JMS 2.0.
It
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> already
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> supports
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>  STOMP today and adding support for OpenWire
would be
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> straight-forward and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> would provide continuity
for existing clients.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Essentially,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> goal could
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> be to combine the existing flexibility of ActiveMQ with
the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> performance of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> HornetQ.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Anyway, these are just some initial
ideas, for now I'm
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> really
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  just
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> interested to know
how the ActiveMQ community would feel
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> about
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> donation of
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the HornetQ codebase.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks and best regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Clebert.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hiram Chirino
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Engineering |
Red Hat, Inc.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hchirino@redhat.com
| fusesource.com | redhat.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> skype: hiramchirino
| twitter: @hiramchirino
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://redhat.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://blog.garytully.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hiram Chirino
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Engineering | Red Hat,
Inc.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hchirino@redhat.com |
fusesource.com | redhat.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> skype: hiramchirino |
twitter: @hiramchirino
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hiram Chirino
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Engineering | Red Hat, Inc.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hchirino@redhat.com | fusesource.com
| redhat.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> skype: hiramchirino | twitter:
@hiramchirino
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://redhat.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://blog.garytully.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://redhat.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://blog.garytully.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hiram Chirino
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Engineering | Red Hat, Inc.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> hchirino@redhat.com | fusesource.com
| redhat.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>> skype: hiramchirino | twitter: @hiramchirino
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>  --
>>>>>>>>>>>> Clebert Suconic
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://community.jboss.org/people/clebert.suconic@jboss.com
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>  --
>>>>>>>>>> Clebert Suconic
>>>>>>>>>> http://community.jboss.org/people/clebert.suconic@jboss.com
>>>>>>>>>> http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>  --
>>>>>>> Hiram Chirino
>>>>>>> Engineering | Red Hat, Inc.
>>>>>>> hchirino@redhat.com | fusesource.com | redhat.com
>>>>>>> skype: hiramchirino | twitter: @hiramchirino
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Clebert Suconic
>>>> http://community.jboss.org/people/clebert.suconic@jboss.com
>>>> http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>


-- 
Clebert Suconic
http://community.jboss.org/people/clebert.suconic@jboss.com
http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com
Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message