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 Fri, 23 Jun 2017 15:18:16 GMT
The discussion is moving to general at incubator.apache.org

http://incubator.apache.org/guides/lists.html

If other people is backing up this.. than I'm all up for it...


so, if you support this, by that I mean.. if you want to get
involved.. then it's a good time to show you interest on that thread:

https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/14bdf3d93c8c6ac3ac7dd9c1d6e6146fd90991581d80e8c6cfaf9540@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E





On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 12:46 PM, Clebert Suconic
<clebert.suconic@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think it will make sense a different project...
>
> for instance: if we make journal a pluggable component there, we could
> have a JournalQueue and JournalHashMap to support some sort of client
> side persistence..
>
> @John: you're the man here.. how we can get this rolling?
>
> On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 2:31 PM, John D. Ament <johndament@apache.org> wrote:
>> Plenty of commons projects use git... https://github.com/apache?q=commons
>>
>> John
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 2:27 PM Clebert Suconic <clebert.suconic@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> 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
>>>
>
>
>
> --
> Clebert Suconic



-- 
Clebert Suconic

Mime
View raw message