activemq-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Justin Bertram <jbert...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Status of NMS & CMS
Date Tue, 19 Mar 2019 05:03:14 GMT
There are a lot of things people can find out by doing their own
investigative leg-work, especially in Open Source. However, I don't see
that as negating the need to provide users with convenience and clarity
where appropriate. I suppose we disagree on where that line is. Perhaps I'm
just extra sensitive to it after having done so much work on the website
recently.


Justin

On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 11:46 PM Michael André Pearce
<michael.andre.pearce@me.com.invalid> wrote:

> People are able to see activity and commit history in github. And able to
> make their own judgements.  Maintaining that anywhere else seems pointless.
>
>
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> > On 19 Mar 2019, at 04:41, Michael André Pearce <
> michael.andre.pearce@me.com> wrote:
> >
> > So as I’m aware the AMQP works just we didn’t publish to nuget. There
> was some random queries about if we could publish I think at the time
> clebert asked this that caused a query to go to legal. I just checked that
> ticket it actually seems like it was a non issue. So we can release it.
> There was activity on this during the summer. I don’t see this as dead.
> >
> > So as I stated much earlier on there is also a netstd project hosted
> externally but impl the api. It’s maintained last release 7 months ago. It
> just shows that nms is not just adopted but also other projects building on
> its api. Far from being inactive.
> >
> >
> > Sent from my iPad
> >
> > On 19 Mar 2019, at 04:29, Justin Bertram <jbertram@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >>> There has been activity even in the amqp impl last year as noted, yes
> it
> >> didnt release but it shows activity and want.
> >>
> >> I feel like I could argue the other direction with this. The AMQP
> >> implementation work showed that one developer was interested and when
> his
> >> priorities changed nobody finished the work which indicates that nobody
> >> else cared.
> >>
> >>
> >>> Like wise there are other projects active and implementing their own
> impl
> >> based on the nms api as i noted.
> >>
> >> I must have missed that along the way. Can you clarify this point?
> >>
> >> Regardless, I'm not suggesting we take down all the available API and
> >> implementation downloads, documentation, etc. I'm simply saying that if
> >> people don't identify themselves as being committed to supporting the
> >> code-base we simply note that on the website so users can make informed
> >> decisions about what software to use.  What's the down-side here?
> >>
> >>
> >> Justin
> >>
> >>> On Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 3:34 AM <michael.andre.pearce@me.com.invalid>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I agree with Jeff here.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Its very similar story with NMS as i noted, its stable api and the open
> >>> wire implementation is well used.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> There has been activity even in the amqp impl last year as noted, yes
> it
> >>> didnt release but it shows activity and want.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Like wise there are other projects active and implementing their own
> impl
> >>> based on the nms api as i noted.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> I agree we can clean up a little with the projects never released and
> >>> literally no activity at all in past few yars, but i think its key to
> keep
> >>> api (released), openwire (released) and amqp (activity in dev/user
> lists)
> >>> ones in the nms space.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Get Outlook for Android
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 11:27 PM +0000, "jgenender" <
> jgenender@apache.org>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Thanks for the explanation.
> >>>
> >>> I think I mentioned Jamie Goodyear had showed interest to help with
> JIRAs
> >>> and know there are others who will help when important JIRAs pop up.  I
> >>> think those APIs are simple clients that probably don’t require a lot
> of
> >>> loving care and are relatively stable.  I don’t think stackoverflow is
> >>> necessarily a good indicator of its use.  They are pretty simple to
> >>> utilize.
> >>> A better indicator of user base is number of downloads.  But I don’t
> know
> >>> if
> >>> we track that.  Also remember these are not major components of AMQ.
> They
> >>> are just connectors so I don’t expect heavy activity.
> >>>
> >>> Also, if there truly are openwire alternatives, then I get your
> point.  But
> >>> STOMP and AMQP are not openwire.
> >>>
> >>> I would agree that there is not likely to be much additional
> enhancements
> >>> to
> >>> them as they do what they do.  But I do see serious bugs getting fixed
> by
> >>> some of the committers.  I think the release of them needs to be fixed
> and
> >>> this came up earlier on CMS, but there was no resolution.  I do know
> Jamie
> >>> wanted and offered to fix it.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Sent from:
> >>> http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ActiveMQ-Dev-f2368404.html
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
>
>

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