activemq-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From artnaseef <>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS} HornetQ & ActiveMQ's next generation
Date Wed, 25 Mar 2015 16:05:37 GMT
Growing the community around HornetQ is the same issue regardless of the
naming - it needs to happen, and just naming it ActiveMQ 6 doesn't really
change anything other than to create the presumption that HornetQ will
succeed as ActiveMQ 6.

Sharing a direction across the community is important, and making sure that
direction is clear is also important.  In that light, I am very glad to be
having this discussion.

The statement "Neglecting to commit to a direction will leave ActiveMQ
rudderless" is valid, but does not decide that direction.  Nor does it mean
that a complete restart of ActiveMQ is the right direction.

So, let's put this back into perspective.

We have the HornetQ donation to ActiveMQ.  To what benefit for the ActiveMQ
community?  Age of the solution is not a compelling argument (consider that
Java is even older than ActiveMQ).

ActiveMQ continues to be very widely used and supported.  It serves
mission-critical functions in large companies across multiple industries,
and even supports critical government infrastructure in many places.

Only time will tell if HornetQ is up to the task on all fronts: strength of
technology; community to maintain, support, and advocate the technology;
ease of installation, use, and monitoring; etc.  Therefore, a presumption
that it will replace an existing, proven solution is premature.

Really, the merits here are hard to argue because I'm not seeing any valid
merits described.

I keep wondering, "what problem are we solving?"  Please help me to
understand this and how the HornetQ donation solves the problem.

View this message in context:
Sent from the ActiveMQ - Dev mailing list archive at

View raw message