Ok. That is a good option too. Activemq6 is the target so we may as well set out on that path.
+1 import to activemq6 branch For package names. We can use an apollo or activemq6 discriminator to allow co existance with 5.x client jars. The number 6 seems a little arbitrary so maybe apollo is better? On 7 Oct 2014 10:00, "Richard Kettelerij" <[email protected]> wrote: > Or morph HornetQ (and parts of Apollo) into a new branch and call it > ActiveMQ 6 right away. Just my 0.02ct > > On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 9:14 PM, Hiram Chirino <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Well, we can put it in a new repo/jira. What should we call it? Keep > > it hornetq? Is the hornetq brand also being donated to the ASF? > > > > On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 8:56 AM, Hadrian Zbarcea <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > I gave this quite a bit of thought. I suspect using the same code name > > > (apollo) would create a lot of undesired confusion. First it'd be hard > to > > > differentiate between the issue/bug reports. Which "apollo" does it > refer > > > to? Second, even more dangerous, the word will go out that apollo is no > > > longer maintained with potentially negative consequences for hornet's > > > adoption. More I think about it, stronger I feel against (re)using the > > > apollo codename. > > > > > > Just my $0.02, > > > Hadrian > > > > > > > > > > > > On 10/03/2014 01:56 PM, Hiram Chirino wrote: > > >> > > >> Yeah that will work. Perhaps it would be easiest to import the code > > >> into a branch in the apollo git branch. That way we can continue to > > >> use apollo codename as the ActiveMQ 'next gen' strategy. > > >> > > >> On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 10:18 AM, Clebert Suconic > > >> <[email protected]> wrote: > > >>> > > >>> Can't we import the repo as is, and cleanup whatever dependencies we > > have > > >>> before a release? There will be a lot of work anyways on making the > > >>> integration? > > >>> > > >>> Some of these things are external dependencies through maven. We can > > just > > >>> clean up anything we have there that already have apache equivalents. > > >>> (e.g. > > >>> the jms API and other things like that). > > >>> > > >>> On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 9:52 AM, Gary Tully <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > >>> > > >>>> the vote is complete[1], I think we can move forward with the ip > > >>>> clearance > > >>>> work. > > >>>> The best folks to weed out the third party deps from the grant are > the > > >>>> HQ > > >>>> guys > > >>>> maybe it is best to sort out the commit rights so we have > > knowledgeable > > >>>> help with the cleanup. > > >>>> > > >>>> [1] > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/activemq-dev/201409.mbox/%3CCAH+vQmPNDAF4=HCoFuh0w6vNU+9vBHc24Dh9_HXnvm=4aqk...@mail.gmail.com%3E > > >>>> > > >>>> On 24 September 2014 15:28, Clebert Suconic < > > [email protected]> > > >>>> wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>>> +1 > > >>>>> > > >>>>> I knew we would have to adapt our dependencies..that will be part > of > > >>>>> the > > >>>>> work after acceptance and before releasing. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 10:01 AM, Hiram Chirino > > >>>>> <[email protected]> > > >>>>> wrote: > > >>>>> > > >>>>>> That sounds good to me. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 7:08 AM, Gary Tully <[email protected] > > > > >>>>> > > >>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> I think we should complete the 'Copyright' section of the ip > > >>>>>>> clearance[1], run a vote to accept the grant and initial > committers > > >>>>>>> and then do the surgery to remove the LPGL deps before completing > > the > > >>>>>>> 'Verify distribution rights' section. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> [1] http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/hornetq.html > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> On 24 September 2014 11:54, Gary Tully <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> I see #1 and #2 are complete. > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> on #3 > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> - there are a bunch of examples and documentation that do not > have > > >>>> > > >>>> the > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> apache license header, but this is covered in the code grant. We > > can > > >>>>>>>> add licenses as appropriate before a release. > > >>>>>>>> -- otherwise we are in the clear. > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> on #4 > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> - There is an issue with jee api jars (jms, jta, ejb etc) from > > >>>> > > >>>> jboss > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> under CDDL or GPL - we will need to replace those with the > > geronimo > > >>>>>>>> counterparts > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> - The jee resource adapter (.rar) implements a bunch of jboss > > >>>>>>>> extension points from ironjacamar-core-api, jboss-jca-api and > > >>>>>>>> jboss-transaction-spi - all LGPL > > >>>>>>>> -- We will need to make a functional version without those > > >>>> > > >>>> extension > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> points. The wildfly specifics will have to live outside apache. > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> - there is a hard dependency on jboss-logging-spi (LGPL) > > >>>>>>>> -- This will require some major surgery to extract the logging > > into > > >>>> > > >>>> a > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> plugin and use possibly slf4j by default. This will touch most > > every > > >>>>>>>> file. > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> - there is a twitter4j dependency under license[1] that we can > > drop > > >>>> > > >>>> if > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> necessary. > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> In summary, before any of the contributed code is released we > will > > >>>>>>>> need to address these dependencies but they need not hinder a > > grant > > >>>>>>>> acceptance. > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> Gary. > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> [1] > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > > https://github.com/hornetq/hornetq/blob/master/distribution/hornetq/src/main/resources/licenses/LICENSE_twitter4j.txt > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> On 10 July 2014 16:53, Hiram Chirino <[email protected]> > > >>>> > > >>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> Hi Clebert , > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> This is a far as I've been able to get with the IP clearance > > form: > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/public/trunk/content/ip-clearance/hornetq.xml > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> I assumed that what you guys want to donate is the code that > > >>>>> > > >>>>> currently > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> exists on github master (commit > > >>>>>>>>> 90d43fbc158a0e6e3028c7179dbcf984757b88fb). > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> Things we still need to do: > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> 1) Get Red Hat to file a CCLA with Schedule B filled out > > >>>>>>>>> 2) Get a list of your active committers and make sure they have > > >>>> > > >>>> CLAs > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> filed. > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> 3) "Check and make sure that for all items included with the > > >>>>>>>>> distribution that is not under the Apache license, we have the > > >>>> > > >>>> right > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> to combine with Apache-licensed code and redistribute" > > >>>>>>>>> 4) Check and make sure that all items depended upon by the > > project > > >>>> > > >>>> is > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> covered by one or more of the approved licenses. > > >>>>>>>>> 5) Run a VOTE thread to accept the code donation. > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> I encourage the rest of the ActiveMQ PMC members to help check > > and > > >>>>>>>>> double check items #3 and #4 before doing #5. > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 10:58 AM, Hiram Chirino < > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> I'll start looking into filling out the ip-clearance from. > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 10:53 AM, Gary Tully < > > [email protected] > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Hi Clebert, > > >>>>>>>>>>> the hornetq specJMS numbers are very impressive so from my > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> perspective > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> we would love to have the code base. > > >>>>>>>>>>> We can then evaluate how best to combine the relative > strengths > > >>>> > > >>>> of > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Apollo and HornetQ for the next gen ActiveMQ. > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Please start the process outlined at [1] and we can look at > > doing > > >>>>> > > >>>>> an > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> import. > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> [1] http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/ > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> On 8 July 2014 15:37, Hiram Chirino <[email protected]> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Clebert, > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> That sounds very interesting! Bringing the HornetQ > community > > >>>> > > >>>> into > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> ActiveMQ would be exciting for me. We could collaborate and > > >>>> > > >>>> bring > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> together the best features of ActiveMQ, Apollo and HornetQ > to > > >>>>> > > >>>>> create > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> an amazing next generation messaging system AND grow our > > >>>> > > >>>> developer > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> community at the same time. Lots of folks have been asking > me > > >>>>> > > >>>>> when > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> will ActiveMQ get JMS 2.0 support, so the fact that HornetQ > > has > > >>>>> > > >>>>> JMS > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> 2.0 support already is big plus in my book! > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> I was building up the Apollo codebase to be that next > > generation > > >>>>>>>>>>>> messaging backbone for ActiveMQ, but perhaps because it's > > mostly > > >>>>>>>>>>>> implemented using Scala, not too many developers got > involved > > >>>> > > >>>> and > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> that's a bit of a problem since the 'Apache Way' of building > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> projects > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> is more about community than code. I have been pondering > > >>>> > > >>>> porting > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Apollo to be just plain Java based. Since HornetQ is Java > > based > > >>>>> > > >>>>> but > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> and has a similar fully async threading architecture like > > >>>> > > >>>> Apollo, > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> perhaps this donation will save me lots of work. > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> :) > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 10:31 AM, Clebert Suconic > > >>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi all, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> My name is Clebert Suconic, I'm the project lead for the > > >>>> > > >>>> HornetQ > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> JMS broker > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> (http://hornetq.jboss.org/). The HornetQ team is currently > > in > > >>>>> > > >>>>> the > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> planning > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> phase for the next release of the broker and we've been > > >>>> > > >>>> thinking > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> about > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> whether it would make sense for us to collaborate more > > closely > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> with the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> ActiveMQ community. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> There is a lot of overlap in the capabilities of the two > > >>>> > > >>>> brokers > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> today and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> it strikes us that it would be beneficial to both > communities > > >>>> > > >>>> for > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> us to join > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> forces to build one truly great JMS broker rather than > spend > > >>>> > > >>>> our > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> time > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> duplicating efforts on both brokers. ActiveMQ has a great > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> community of > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> developers and users and it'd be great to be able to > > >>>> > > >>>> consolidate > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> our work > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> there. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> My understanding is that the Apollo sub-project aimed to > > >>>> > > >>>> provide > > >>>>> > > >>>>> a > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> basis for > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> the next generation of ActiveMQ, addressing some of the > > current > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> limitations. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Perhaps HornetQ could be an alternative. HornetQ has some > > good > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> performance > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> and scalability numbers as well as support for JMS 2.0. It > > >>>>> > > >>>>> already > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> supports > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> STOMP today and adding support for OpenWire would be > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> straight-forward and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> would provide continuity for existing clients. Essentially, > > the > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> goal could > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> be to combine the existing flexibility of ActiveMQ with the > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> performance of > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> HornetQ. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Anyway, these are just some initial ideas, for now I'm > really > > >>>>> > > >>>>> just > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> interested to know how the ActiveMQ community would feel > > about > > >>>> > > >>>> a > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> donation of > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> the HornetQ codebase. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks and best regards, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Clebert. > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Hiram Chirino > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Engineering | Red Hat, Inc. > > >>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected] | fusesource.com | redhat.com > > >>>>>>>>>>>> skype: hiramchirino | twitter: @hiramchirino > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>>>>>> http://redhat.com > > >>>>>>>>>>> http://blog.garytully.com > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>>>>> Hiram Chirino > > >>>>>>>>>> Engineering | Red Hat, Inc. > > >>>>>>>>>> [email protected] | fusesource.com | redhat.com > > >>>>>>>>>> skype: hiramchirino | twitter: @hiramchirino > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>>>> Hiram Chirino > > >>>>>>>>> Engineering | Red Hat, Inc. > > >>>>>>>>> [email protected] | fusesource.com | redhat.com > > >>>>>>>>> skype: hiramchirino | twitter: @hiramchirino > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>>> http://redhat.com > > >>>>>>>> http://blog.garytully.com > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>> http://redhat.com > > >>>>>>> http://blog.garytully.com > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> -- > > >>>>>> Hiram Chirino > > >>>>>> Engineering | Red Hat, Inc. > > >>>>>> [email protected] | fusesource.com | redhat.com > > >>>>>> skype: hiramchirino | twitter: @hiramchirino > > >>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> -- > > >>>>> Clebert Suconic > > >>>>> http://community.jboss.org/people/[email protected] > > >>>>> http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com > > >>>>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> -- > > >>> Clebert Suconic > > >>> http://community.jboss.org/people/[email protected] > > >>> http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Hiram Chirino > > Engineering | Red Hat, Inc. > > [email protected] | fusesource.com | redhat.com > > skype: hiramchirino | twitter: @hiramchirino > > >
