activemq-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Clebert Suconic <clebert.suco...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] - Propose new sub-project activemq-extras
Date Wed, 21 Jun 2017 18:26:53 GMT
One extra reason to not use commons:


SVN :)


How would we proceed?  Since this is a new project I don't think we need a
vote here at activemq right?

On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 2:19 PM Clebert Suconic <clebert.suconic@gmail.com>
wrote:

> On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 2:16 PM John D. Ament <johndament@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
>> Well, in theory you could create an Apache Messaging Components project
>> that was made up a variety of small projects like this.
>>
>> For Kafka-JMS, I would strongly encourage you to work with the Kafka
>> Community to bring this to them first instead of creating a new project.
>
>
> Sure.
> That was just a rhetorical possibility.  Didn't mean to list exact
> projects now. Just trying to determine  in what direction this could go.
>
>
>
>>
>> John
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 2:12 PM Clebert Suconic <
>> clebert.suconic@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > There would be possibly a few smaller projects
>> >
>> >
>> > For now I can see at least 3.
>> >
>> > Pool
>> > Serialialization avro
>> > Kafka-JMS Integration.
>> >
>> >
>> > It would be beyond the scope of commons I think. Unless they are ok with
>> > many small projects.
>> >
>> >
>> > In the past I wanted to spinof the journal and libaio separately also.
>> > Could we make this in this context of a new project ?
>> >
>> > Iif we made it something like messaging-tools these could all fit in the
>> > same sub project?.
>> >
>> > On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 1:52 PM John D. Ament <johndament@apache.org>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > We can definitely try an incubating project, if it makes sense for
>> this
>> > to
>> > > be an eventual TLP or subproject.  However, I was wondering if Apache
>> > > Commons was a possible location for this project?  They tend to run
>> with
>> > ad
>> > > hoc smallish projects with a single PMC with enough oversight to cut
>> > valid
>> > > releases.  Their projects are generally smaller, utility libraries and
>> > the
>> > > core inners of projects.
>> > >
>> > > Let me know if you want to proceed with incubation.  We'd need to dig
>> up
>> > > some mentors for the project.
>> > >
>> > > John
>> > >
>> > > On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 6:48 PM Timothy Bish <tabish121@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > On 06/09/2017 09:58 AM, Matt Pavlovich wrote:
>> > > > > Do we not already have precedent for something similar?  NMS
is a
>> > > > sub-project of ActiveMQ but includes support for non-ActiveMQ
>> brokers.
>> > > >
>> > > > The NMS bits aren't quite the same as this as the initial goal of
>> that
>> > > > was to create a .NET based ActiveMQ client and it sort of morphed
>> out
>> > > > from there.  There are some similarities though and in those you can
>> > > > kind of see the problem of putting a bunch of non-ActiveMQ type bits
>> > > > under and ActiveMQ subproject.  The NMS project has never grown
>> much of
>> > > > a community of developers to support all the various client
>> > > > implementations, there's many just two people who contribute.  As
>> such
>> > > > the project has mostly died, there hasn't been any releases in a
>> long
>> > > > time, an some of the implementations have never seen an official
>> > release
>> > > > as there was nobody to manage it.  I felt for a long time like NMS
>> > would
>> > > > have been better served as it's own project but my desire to work
on
>> > > > .NET code is quite low so I never pushed to move it to incubator but
>> > > > really that's what should have happened in my mind.
>> > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > >> On Jun 9, 2017, at 8:39 AM, Timothy Bish <tabish121@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >> On 06/09/2017 09:04 AM, Clebert Suconic wrote:
>> > > > >>> Yip. That's the idea.  The connection pool was mentioned
at the
>> top
>> > > > from
>> > > > >>> Michael.
>> > > > >>>
>> > > > >>> I'm just thinking if we could expand the scope a bit
so we won't
>> > open
>> > > > a new
>> > > > >>> incubatorb project for just two libraries.
>> > > > >> The initial scope as presented was
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >> {quote}
>> > > > >> Some of these could be:
>> > > > >> PooledConnectionFactory
>> > > > >> Proposed custom serdes idea
>> > > > >> Possible future kafka integrations
>> > > > >> Etc.
>> > > > >> {quote}
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >> Given you've got two concrete one sort of abstract and one
etc it
>> > > seems
>> > > > there's some hints at there being more than just two libraries.  The
>> > > thing
>> > > > I'd prefer not to do is to create stuff that gets hidden in the
>> noise
>> > of
>> > > > the ActiveMQ project which is to create a great messaging broker
>> where
>> > it
>> > > > could be something that can stand on its own and have its own
>> community
>> > > etc.
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >> It seems that some actual thought about what you are trying
to
>> > achieve
>> > > > with these proposed bits will help sort out where they should live.
>> > The
>> > > > natural thing to do is create new ActiveMQ modules are subprojects
>> but
>> > > just
>> > > > because it's easy to do that doesn't always mean its the best thing
>> in
>> > > the
>> > > > long run.
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >>> Someone could argue that a messaging integration library
should
>> > live
>> > > on
>> > > > >>> Camel as the Messaging Integration project.
>> > > > >> Someone could argue that Camel already provides quite a bit
of
>> > > this....
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >>> But I won't discuss much this now.  I'm about to travel
and
>> won't
>> > be
>> > > > able
>> > > > >>> to answer emails next week.
>> > > > >>>
>> > > > >>>
>> > > > >>>
>> > > > >>> On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 5:34 AM Andy Taylor <
>> andy.tayls67@gmail.com
>> > >
>> > > > wrote:
>> > > > >>>
>> > > > >>>> The JMS connection Pool currently in ActiveMQ could
live there
>> > > > >>>>
>> > > > >>>> On 9 June 2017 at 04:52, Clebert Suconic <
>> > clebert.suconic@gmail.com
>> > > >
>> > > > >>>> wrote:
>> > > > >>>>
>> > > > >>>>> As long as we can define a bigger scope.. otherwise
wouldn't
>> be
>> > an
>> > > > >>>>> overkill to start a project for this?
>> > > > >>>>>
>> > > > >>>>> What's the name? commons-messaging?
>> > > > >>>>>
>> > > > >>>>>
>> > > > >>>>> but there's already a commons project within
apache...
>> > > > >>>>>
>> > > > >>>>>
>> > > > >>>>> I will be away for 2 weeks... Hope this to be
sorted while I'm
>> > away
>> > > > ..
>> > > > >>>>> .please???
>> > > > >>>>>
>> > > > >>>>>
>> > > > >>>>> Just kidding though.. if it's not sorted.. I
may revisit this
>> > route
>> > > > as
>> > > > >>>>> well. for now @michael use your or a new github
account until
>> we
>> > > > >>>>> figure out where.
>> > > > >>>>>
>> > > > >>>>>
>> > > > >>>>> On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 1:06 PM, Timothy Bish
<
>> > tabish121@gmail.com>
>> > > > >>>> wrote:
>> > > > >>>>>> On 06/08/2017 11:21 AM, Michael André Pearce
wrote:
>> > > > >>>>>>> Hi All
>> > > > >>>>>>>
>> > > > >>>>>>> I would like to discuss proposing a new
sub project , named
>> > > > >>>>>>> "activemq-extras"
>> > > > >>>>>>>
>> > > > >>>>>>> There is some common / generic components
not specific to
>> > > > activemq5 ,
>> > > > >>>>>>> artemis, qpid jms that currently live
within or without some
>> > > extras
>> > > > >>>>> project
>> > > > >>>>>>> would end up living in one.
>> > > > >>>>>>>
>> > > > >>>>>>> Some of these could be:
>> > > > >>>>>>> PooledConnectionFactory
>> > > > >>>>>>> Proposed custom serdes idea
>> > > > >>>>>>> Possible future kafka integrations
>> > > > >>>>>>> Etc.
>> > > > >>>>>> Given the scope outlined here as well as
the aspiration to
>> make
>> > > > this a
>> > > > >>>>> cross
>> > > > >>>>>> cutting set of features that work with clients
that aren't
>> part
>> > of
>> > > > >>>>> ActiveMQ
>> > > > >>>>>> land but just JMS clients in general then
I'd lean towards a
>> -1
>> > of
>> > > > >>>>> creating
>> > > > >>>>>> a new subproject or building new modules
into Artemis that
>> > provide
>> > > > >>>> these
>> > > > >>>>>> features.
>> > > > >>>>>>
>> > > > >>>>>> My suggestion would be to go the route of
an incubator
>> project
>> > > where
>> > > > >>>> you
>> > > > >>>>>> could work out the goals as aspirations of
this new project
>> and
>> > > > build a
>> > > > >>>>>> community around that.  I think there would
be more
>> willingness
>> > > from
>> > > > >>>>> folks
>> > > > >>>>>> that aren't ActiveMQ centric developers to
contribute to a
>> > project
>> > > > that
>> > > > >>>>>> lives on it's own given the current goal
seems to be that
>> it's
>> > > > >>>> something
>> > > > >>>>>> that works with many different JMS client
implementations,
>> most
>> > of
>> > > > >>>> which
>> > > > >>>>>> aren't ActiveMQ....
>> > > > >>>>>>
>> > > > >>>>>> Have a look at the incubator process (
>> > > http://incubator.apache.org/)
>> > > > I
>> > > > >>>>> think
>> > > > >>>>>> it lends itself to what's being proposed
here more so than
>> just
>> > > > >>>> spinning
>> > > > >>>>> up
>> > > > >>>>>> a subproject and starting to write some code.
>> > > > >>>>>>
>> > > > >>>>>>
>> > > > >>>>>>
>> > > > >>>>>>
>> > > > >>>>>>> The idea then is these "extras" are generic
in fact they
>> can be
>> > > > >>>>>>> released independently,
>> > > > >>>>>>> don't affect the core products
>> > > > >>>>>>> are generic meaning they can be re-used.
>> > > > >>>>>>> Optional for end users to use.
>> > > > >>>>>>>
>> > > > >>>>>>> Cheers
>> > > > >>>>>>> Mike
>> > > > >>>>>>>
>> > > > >>>>>>>
>> > > > >>>>>>>
>> > > > >>>>>>>
>> > > > >>>>>>>
>> > > > >>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>> > > > >>>>>>
>> > > > >>>>>> --
>> > > > >>>>>> Tim Bish
>> > > > >>>>>> twitter: @tabish121
>> > > > >>>>>> blog: http://timbish.blogspot.com/
>> > > > >>>>>>
>> > > > >>>>>
>> > > > >>>>> --
>> > > > >>>>> Clebert Suconic
>> > > > >>>>>
>> > > > >> --
>> > > > >> Tim Bish
>> > > > >> twitter: @tabish121
>> > > > >> blog: http://timbish.blogspot.com/
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > --
>> > > > Tim Bish
>> > > > twitter: @tabish121
>> > > > blog: http://timbish.blogspot.com/
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > --
>> > Clebert Suconic
>> >
>>
> --
> Clebert Suconic
>
-- 
Clebert Suconic

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message