+1 I like the activemq6 idea better too
On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 9:05 AM, Hadrian Zbarcea <[email protected]> wrote: > activemq-6 sounds good. It's also consistent with other things that > happened the past (like the transition from smx 3 to 4). > > I am not sure if a branch is better or a separate repo. Since we're > already on git, my preference would be the latter. > > Hadrian > > > On 10/07/2014 04:59 AM, Richard Kettelerij 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= >>> [email protected]%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 >>> >>> > -- Clebert Suconic http://community.jboss.org/people/[email protected] http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com
