activemq-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Clebert Suconic <>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] ActiveMQ Artemis Native as a separated project
Date Wed, 30 Jan 2019 17:14:26 GMT
Yes.. We should move the java part as well to be more reusable.

On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 11:51 AM michael.andre.pearce
<> wrote:
> Tbh, i see nothing wrong with making it a mini sub project. If anything having some sub
projects is a good thing.
> Would the supporting java code be moved also?
> And would we look to make the interfaces more generic?
> Im keen if we separate something thats currently tighly embedded in artemis, we make
sure it is much more re-usable (e.g. even example alternative uses).
> On that note, i think there are other bits that could be split out, a bit like what occured
in activemq5.
> E.g. spring integration, protocol manager, other extensions
> And should welcome this a little more with newer extensions or features that enhance
activemq but not core broker.
> Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.
> -------- Original message --------From: Clebert Suconic <>
Date: 30/01/2019  16:31  (GMT+00:00) To: Subject: [DISCUSS] ActiveMQ
Artemis Native as a separated project
> One of the modules of ActiveMQ Artemis is the Native Layer:
> We currently hold all JNI Calls (pretty much libaio ATM).
> It is stable and the release cycle is very long. Maybe one or two
> changes an year with the current scope. This may become different if
> we expand the scope of JNI operations supported by the broker).
> I would like to make it a separate git repository from ActiveMQ
> Artemis, with its own releasy cycle. (we would even be able to remove
> the currently .so that are currently checked in on artemis).  It is
> the sensitive thing to do.
> I don't think it as a separate project, just as a separate repository
> with its own release cycle to make things easier.
> I would like to name it ActiveMQ-Native, dropping the word Artemis, as
> it would be used for any further JNI operations needed for any other
> Java Projects part of ActiveMQ Artemis. We currently only have libaio,
> but I would keep the door open for other JNI operations we may need.
> I was wondering if anyone have any other ideas around it.
> Also: Would we need a vote to proceed on such change after we reach a
> consensus on what to do here?
> --
> Clebert Suconic

Clebert Suconic

View raw message