activemq-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Hadrian Zbarcea <hzbar...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS} HornetQ & ActiveMQ's next generation
Date Fri, 27 Mar 2015 18:54:47 GMT
Absolutely not. The activemq community works on one broker the HornetQ 
one on another. Competition is good. If some developers choose, for 
whatever reason I will not speculate on, to work on both, yes, it is 
possible for them to do some extra work.

Hadrian


On 03/27/2015 02:47 PM, Jon Anstey wrote:
> Putting in new features and maintaining 2 separate brokers will be more
> work overall than just one. Surely you can agree with me on that? :-)
>
> On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 4:12 PM, Jamie G. <jamie.goodyear@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Good question, how is that more work for everyone? More choices, sure.
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 4:06 PM, Hadrian Zbarcea <hzbarcea@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> Really Jon?
>>>
>>> How will that "make more work for everyone"? Who is everyone.
>>>
>>> Hadrian
>>>
>>>
>>> On 03/27/2015 02:30 PM, Jon Anstey wrote:
>>>>
>>>> If you read the initial thread for the code grant, the whole point was
>> to
>>>> NOT have 2 brokers & communities; it was to work together as one.
>>>>
>>>> "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."
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>> http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Possible-HornetQ-donation-to-ActiveMQ-td4682971.html
>>>>
>>>> IMO putting this new broker in the incubator is a bad idea and will just
>>>> make more work for everyone...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 3:23 PM, James Carman <
>> james@carmanconsulting.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I'm with Hadrian on this one.  Incubation seems like the proper route
>>>>> for this code, to me.  HornetQ already has a well-established
>>>>> community and apparently a kick-ass code base.  One might wonder why
>>>>> HornetQ wants to come here in the first place if everything is so
>>>>> unicorns and rainbows.  Anyway, if there are features of AMQ that
>>>>> HornetQ (or whatever name it decides to take on here at the ASF) wants
>>>>> from AMQ, it can easily integrate them as they see fit, without the
>>>>> burden of trying to maintain backward compatibility and develop a
>>>>> smooth migration path.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 1:28 PM, Hiram Chirino <hiram@hiramchirino.com
>>>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've been trying to keep quite to get an idea of different folks
view
>>>>>> points.  At this point I think it's fair to say that the ActiveMQ
>>>>>> project has not reached consensus that the HornetQ code contribution
>>>>>> is ready to become the successor to ActiveMQ 5.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So calling the git repo for the code donation activemq-6, was probably
>>>>>> a bad idea.  A this point I think the code donation should follow
the
>>>>>> path the apollo took and switch to a code name.  It should continue
to
>>>>>> do milestone release and solicit the help of ActiveMQ 5.x
>>>>>> users/developers to help mature into the successor that it wants
to
>>>>>> become.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We can then revisit renaming to an ActiveMQ N, once it has matured
to
>>>>>> the point there is little objection to it becoming the successor.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 11:22 AM, Rich Bowen <rbowen@rcbowen.com>
>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [I see that some of what I put in this email has already been
said by
>>>>>>> others, but I'm going to go ahead and send it, because it needs
to be
>>>>>>> heard.)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 03/26/2015 12:02 PM, Hiram Chirino wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi Chris,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If you take a peek at the source code for the code grant
I think
>>>>>>>> you'll notice that all the original HornetQ references have
been
>>>>>>>> removed/replaced by ActiveMQ.  So I think we are ok from
a TM
>>>>>>>> perspective.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> A much larger concern (at least to me) is not merely the naming,
but
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> perception that a completely new codebase has been brought to
the
>>>>>
>>>>> project,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> replaced the existing work wholesale, and been called the next
>> version.
>>>>>
>>>>> This
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> is how it's been described to me by several different members
of the
>>>>>
>>>>> project
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> community, and their perception is that this has been done without
>> the
>>>>>>> consent of the community. This is, of course, a fairly serious
>>>>>
>>>>> accusation.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Related to this is the assertion that the PMC has been somewhat
>> biased
>>>>>
>>>>> on
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> who has been invited to join their numbers, based on corporate
>>>>>
>>>>> affiliation -
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> an even more serious accusation.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The analogy that was offered to me was that of the IIS code being
>>>>>
>>>>> imported
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> into the Apache httpd code tree, and released as httpd 3.0, by
virtue
>>>>>
>>>>> of a
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> majority Microsoft presence on the PMC.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I recognize that this is a very harsh accusation. The folks that
have
>>>>>>> brought this concern to me have done so privately because they
feel
>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>> their voice is ignored on the PMC list.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In terms of how this situation might be resolved, two things
have
>> been
>>>>>>> suggested.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 1) Invite some of your 30+ non-PMC committers onto the PMC.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2) Go ahead and release something based on HornetQ, just don't
call
>> it
>>>>>
>>>>> the
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> next version of ActiveMQ over the objections of the minority.
(I see
>>>>>
>>>>> that
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> this solution has been addressed by others, recommending that
the
>> code
>>>>>
>>>>> be
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> taken to the incubator.)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Rich Bowen - rbowen@rcbowen.com - @rbowen
>>>>>>> http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Hiram Chirino
>>>>>> Engineering | Red Hat, Inc.
>>>>>> hchirino@redhat.com | fusesource.com | redhat.com
>>>>>> skype: hiramchirino | twitter: @hiramchirino
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>

Mime
View raw message