qpid-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gordon Sim <g...@redhat.com>
Subject Re: AMQP 0-9 support
Date Wed, 17 Jan 2007 15:36:18 GMT
Alan Conway wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-01-17 at 15:18 +0000, Gordon Sim wrote:
>>> But if we successfully negotiate a 0-9 connection on a broker which
>>> supports both the new (Request/Response) AND the old (MethodBody)
>>> framing - so as to be 0-9 and 0-9-WIP compliant, which would be used to
>>> start the connection? It seems to me that there is no way for the client
>>> to inform the broker up front.
>> Wasn't the 99 major number reserved for WIP type work? Can we claim the 
>> 99-1 id for the WIP sections of 0-9?
> 
> The situation with C++ is not too bad. We won't support 0-8 in the first
> cut but we haven't ditched any of the basic stuff or the old framing,
> it's just disconnected. I think it might be fairly straightforward to
> reconnect it conditionally.
> 
> So I'd say the C++ position is: we are first aiming to get 0-9 working
> without 0-8. We wont slow ourselves down worrying about 0-8 but we wont
> needlessly throw 0-8 stuff away either.Once 0-9 works we can look at
> re-enabling 0-8 conditionally, and it might not be as hard as I
> originally thought.
> 
> We might get a multi-version broker out of this yet- but it's not top
> priority.

I don't see a need to provide interop between 0.8 and 0-9. My question 
was whether we aim to be 0-9 'compliant' and whether that would be 
possible if we only implemented the WIP parts. When you say 'we are 
first aiming to get 0-9 working' do you mean the WIP part only?

Mime
View raw message