From users-return-4244-apmail-qpid-users-archive=qpid.apache.org@qpid.apache.org Thu Jun 9 15:03:27 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-qpid-users-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-qpid-users-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B3C7E6F26 for ; Thu, 9 Jun 2011 15:03:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 32116 invoked by uid 500); 9 Jun 2011 15:03:27 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-qpid-users-archive@qpid.apache.org Received: (qmail 32095 invoked by uid 500); 9 Jun 2011 15:03:27 -0000 Mailing-List: contact users-help@qpid.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: users@qpid.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list users@qpid.apache.org Received: (qmail 32087 invoked by uid 99); 9 Jun 2011 15:03:27 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 09 Jun 2011 15:03:27 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.0 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of gsim@redhat.com designates 209.132.183.28 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.132.183.28] (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 09 Jun 2011 15:03:21 +0000 Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p59F2sc1006734 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Thu, 9 Jun 2011 11:02:59 -0400 Received: from [10.3.237.38] (vpn-237-38.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.237.38]) by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p59F2r8T009128 for ; Thu, 9 Jun 2011 11:02:53 -0400 Message-ID: <4DF0E04F.9040800@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2011 16:01:35 +0100 From: Gordon Sim Organization: Red Hat UK Ltd, Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No. 3798903, Directors: Michael Cunningham (USA), Brendan Lane (Ireland), Matt Parsons (USA), Charlie Peters (USA) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.1.15) Gecko/20101027 Fedora/3.0.10-1.fc12 Lightning/1.0b1 Thunderbird/3.0.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: users@qpid.apache.org Subject: Re: Recommended API for Python? References: <4DF0A267.5020209@redhat.com>, <4DE921C0.2000509@princeton.com> <4DE92EB9.6050806@redhat.com> <4DEEBBFA.30708@princeton.com> <4DEF7263.7020505@redhat.com> <4DEF9139.9030202@princeton.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.68 on 10.5.11.23 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On 06/09/2011 03:48 PM, AFoglia@princeton.com wrote: > On 6/9/2011 6:37 AM, Gordon Sim wrote: >> I would also echo Ted's comments, that the messaging API is really >> what we recommend, and that the swigged version when completed >> would be a drop in replacement for that (avoiding annoyances like >> the above). > > I agree that it should be a drop-in replacement, and I'm willing to > help make the necessary changes, but I don't see where. In the 0.10 > release, there's the python package, > qpidc-0.10/bindings/qpid/python/cqpid.py, that would need to be > patched, but I don't see that in the repository. It's generated by swig. > Where would the changes need to go? I believe that the swig generation process can be customised to a degree. However I suspect that would not be sufficient to be a drop in replacement and that therefore some adapter layer would be required. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation Project: http://qpid.apache.org Use/Interact: mailto:users-subscribe@qpid.apache.org