qpid-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Robert Godfrey" <rob.j.godf...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Qpid M2 Branching / C++ 0.9 Merging
Date Wed, 07 Mar 2007 15:24:23 GMT
My ambition for the M2 release is only to have interop at the basic AMQP
level - that means that we will not be interoperable at the JMS level as
this requires extensions on top of basic AMQP.  While we work those
extensions through the AMQP process I don't think we need all the other
clients to be operating to this level.  It is already clear that as we talk
through these extensions to AMQP, other AMQP members are coming up with
refinements to our initial solutions which mean we will have to rework.
Having said that, because of requirements put forward by people actually
using the software, we have built a higher level of interoperability at the
JMS level into the .net and C++ clients, and C++ broker (i.e. extending the
FieldTable to cope with the new types).

On 07/03/07, Martin Ritchie <ritchiem@apache.org> wrote:
>
> This release is very important for the project as everyone has done so
> much good work since M1 and it is precisely why we need to get a good
> M2 release done before we have a quite period whilst we sort out our
> position for 0-9 and 0-10. I am not against the release in any way I
> think we need to do this release it is just important to scope it
> correctly and ensure we manage it well as a divided community cannot
> progress as fast as one that is fully behind the trunk.



Yes - indeed.  I think that is everybody's feeling.  The idea of doing an M2
release now is to recognise the great strides we have made since M1, and to
put out a checkpoint of that which early adopters may use.  In the meantime
that allows us to move trunk on, and make the necessary changes required to
move us to AMQP 0-10 (and eventually) AMQP 1-0 support.

It would be good to learn from the current difficulties that are being
> faced with the maintaining two versions of our code base so that we
> can all focus on driving Qpid forward as a whole.
>
> My understanding of the interop that we were after was more than just
> being able to send simple messages between clients. If that is minimum
> level we wish to support with this release then that is a much more
> manageable task. Which is totally possible in the next few days which
> won't hold up our 0.9 merge so we can push on to 0.10.


 Excellent - this is what I think we are aiming at.  M2 will be a release of
clients and brokers interoperable at an AMQP level.  In addition, the
combination of Java client and Java Broker will be sufficiently JMS
compliant to pass the JMS TCK.

Do we want interop to go beyond sending simple messages between
> clients to supporting something like the JMS Message types across all
> clients?



No - definitely not :-)

The  mapping of JMS to AMQP has been proposed and is being worked on at the
AMQP level, but it is premature to try to use our current encoding in all
our clients until it is an AMQP standard.

-- Rob

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message