Mailing-List: contact esme-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: esme-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of esjewett@gmail.com designates
 209.85.160.175 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :content-type;
        b=quRSdKhXJWIT6BpKgtPJ4KSpgTSHYmAMXlHZi5E6zhbFjyiRz9kj9DullWnC44kJqj
         //yfWc42swIz0J2vWtOcLHB42lxAFt5vJJzP5PWaJgzXciQ5m/dIHfzI0IHAPsPBccoZ
         NQZMsvNOSKrIgmcv6ABvSWptnmEGXIlkkQTJQ=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=viyR_WyazJVaF3WrnZ-G5VsPSof0VMB4wDbak@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AANLkTi=viyR_WyazJVaF3WrnZ-G5VsPSof0VMB4wDbak@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2010 16:42:46 +0100
Message-ID: <AANLkTinijThywZ+8TngwJw55Ub9vomOj7WeO+HMSUph_@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: ESME and Akka
From: Ethan Jewett <esjewett@gmail.com>
To: esme-dev@incubator.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001485f5cd8cc66c1504948c790f

--001485f5cd8cc66c1504948c790f
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

+1

Question: Are Lift actors and Akka actors compatible? So, for example, could
we do this incrementally, replacing the Distributor with Akka actors first
and then working out to the other actors?

Ethan

On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 3:40 PM, Vassil Dichev <vdichev@apache.org> wrote:

> Folks,
>
> For a while I've been thinking about integrating Akka
> (http://akkasource.org/) into ESME. Akka is a library for concurrency,
> fault-tolerance and remoting and actors are one of its most important
> components. The advantages of using Akka are:
>
> 1. Easy remoting- it's trivial to make an actor remote
> (http://doc.akkasource.org/remote-actors-java). This might help with
> federation/clustering in the future.
> 2. Akka has nice Camel integration (http://doc.akkasource.org/camel).
> Camel has a lot of endpoint components, which are conspicuously
> similar in intent to our actions:
> (http://camel.apache.org/components.html). If we replace our actions
> with Camel components, we will have a ready DSL for dozens of actions
> at little extra effort. For instance, XMPP support is supposed to
> become trivial (at least at first glance).
>
> The upside is that it should be fairly ealy to replace Lift actors
> with Akka actors where (and if) needed. The downside is having another
> library dependency- but we also won't need to implement and maintain
> all the different action types.
>
> What do you think? I will let you know how this idea matures and how
> my research goes.
> Vassil
>

--001485f5cd8cc66c1504948c790f--