activemq-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From semog <>
Subject Re: NMS Download?
Date Thu, 20 Nov 2008 01:36:04 GMT

Hi Will,

Thanks for the feedback on the assembly packaging.  I had originally been
thinking of doing a Release build only package, and leaving a debug build to
the developer to create.  I can look into creating a Debug build package as
well, but it'll be lower priority.

The WCF provider was recently contributed by David Keaveny.  It's not
complete, as he has some more advanced functionality to finish up.  There
are no unit tests for it, so I can't verify the extent of its stability.  I
think the basics are there, though.  If you have an interest in using a WCF
provider to connect to ActiveMQ, please take at look at it.  I'm sure David
would love to have some usage and feedback on it.  You can enter any issues
you find into the JIRA database.  There is a new WCF module that these
issues can be logged under.  Also, any contributed unit tests for NUnit
would be greatly appreciated.

- Jim

Will Darby wrote:
> Thanks for the quick reply.
> Then the best way to get the current version is directly using Subversion?
> It looks like you've baselined version 1.0.0 already.
> My personal preference on packaging would include all providers in a
> single package. Seems like this would help to eliminate incompatibilities
> between the NMS base and the providers.
> Regarding the assemblies, I like the way that Spring.NET is distributed.
> It contains assemblies by .NET version with release and debug assemblies.
> In browsing the packages I noticed the WCF provider. I'm very interested
> in this, can you provide a brief description?
> Thanks again.
> - Will
> semog wrote:
>> Hi Will,
>> It wasn't intentionally removed, it just hasn't been filled in yet.  I
>> have some semi-official binaries built, but have not created a single
>> package of them yet.  I am working on the scripts that will take the
>> binaries and create a single download file.  I haven't decided the
>> best way of packaging them.  It may be that each provider will get its
>> own download package, and users will be able to pick and choose which
>> packages to download.  I think this may be better than a single
>> package that includes all provider implementations.
>> Thoughts on the best way to package up the assemblies?
>> -Jim

View this message in context:
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at

View raw message