qpid-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alan Conway <acon...@redhat.com>
Subject Re: To extend or not (was RE: QPID/HermesJMS)
Date Fri, 22 Sep 2006 19:19:43 GMT
Not only reasonable, it's inevitable. We can't build qpid without having
such an API inside it's only a question of how much we document and
promote it to users. 

On Wed, 2006-09-20 at 10:49 -0400, Rajith Attapattu wrote:
> Greg,
> 
> What I am also pushing is for a protocol level API.
> Even if we don't document this or promote this API, I still think from a
> design POV we need to have a cleaner seperation.
> So why not have protocol API and then have that 'extended JMS API' if you
> will.
> 
> But lets not kill the idea of a protocol level API.
> 
> Does this sound like a reasonable compromise???
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Rajith
> 
> On 9/19/06, Gordon Sim <gsim@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > Robert Greig wrote:
> > > Unless what is being proposed is
> > > what I read into Gordon's comments (I don't want to put words in your
> > > mouth so let me know if I'm misrerepresenting you Gordon) which is a
> > > strictly protocol-level API.
> >
> > Yes, I was talking about a protocol-level API.
> >


Mime
View raw message