+1 for separate repo. It makes sense. Regards JB
-------- Original message -------- From: Clebert Suconic <clebert.suco...@gmail.com> Date:10/10/2014 16:20 (GMT+01:00) To: dev@activemq.apache.org Cc: Subject: Re: Possible HornetQ donation to ActiveMQ I'm +1 for a separate repo as long as it's git... we can merge the repositories later if you decide so with a simple git push command. On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 10:16 AM, Hadrian Zbarcea <hzbar...@gmail.com> wrote: > Do we want a separate repository (my preference) or a branch in the > current one? > For the former case, I think infra@ needs to create the repo, then we > could import it. > > Can we reach a lazy consensus, do we need/want a formal vote on this? > Hadrian > > > On 10/10/2014 10:04 AM, Clebert Suconic wrote: > >> How to bootstrap this.. who will make the initial import? >> >> From my understanding we need the repository created before we can have >> access for it. >> >> We are moving our attention towards the new repository gradually. Having >> it >> created will help us speed up the process. >> >> On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 5:29 AM, Dejan Bosanac <de...@nighttale.net> >> wrote: >> >> +1 for activemq6 as well. >>> >>> Regards >>> -- >>> Dejan Bosanac >>> ---------------------- >>> Red Hat, Inc. >>> dbosa...@redhat.com >>> Twitter: @dejanb >>> Blog: http://sensatic.net >>> ActiveMQ in Action: http://www.manning.com/snyder/ >>> >>> On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 3:12 PM, Clebert Suconic < >>> clebert.suco...@gmail.com >>> wrote: >>> >>> +1 >>>> >>>> I like the activemq6 idea better too >>>> >>>> On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 9:05 AM, Hadrian Zbarcea <hzbar...@gmail.com> >>>> 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 <hi...@hiramchirino.com >>>>>> 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 <hzbar...@gmail.com> >>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>>> <clebert.suco...@gmail.com> 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 <gary.tu...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> 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 < >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> clebert.suco...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>>>>>> <hi...@hiramchirino.com> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> That sounds good to me. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 7:08 AM, Gary Tully < >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> gary.tu...@gmail.com> >>>> >>>>> 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 <gary.tu...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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 <hi...@hiramchirino.com >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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 < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hi...@hiramchirino.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'll start looking into filling out the ip-clearance from. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 10:53 AM, Gary Tully < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gary.tu...@gmail.com >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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 < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hi...@hiramchirino.com >>> >>>> 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 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <clebert.suco...@gmail.com> 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. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hchir...@redhat.com | fusesource.com | redhat.com >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> skype: hiramchirino | twitter: @hiramchirino >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://redhat.com >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://blog.garytully.com >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hiram Chirino >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Engineering | Red Hat, Inc. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hchir...@redhat.com | fusesource.com | redhat.com >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> skype: hiramchirino | twitter: @hiramchirino >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hiram Chirino >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Engineering | Red Hat, Inc. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hchir...@redhat.com | 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. >>>>>>>>>>>>> hchir...@redhat.com | fusesource.com | redhat.com >>>>>>>>>>>>> skype: hiramchirino | twitter: @hiramchirino >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>> Clebert Suconic >>>>>>>>>>>> http://community.jboss.org/people/clebert.suco...@jboss.com >>>>>>>>>>>> http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>> Clebert Suconic >>>>>>>>>> http://community.jboss.org/people/clebert.suco...@jboss.com >>>>>>>>>> http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Hiram Chirino >>>>>>> Engineering | Red Hat, Inc. >>>>>>> hchir...@redhat.com | fusesource.com | redhat.com >>>>>>> skype: hiramchirino | twitter: @hiramchirino >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>> -- >>>> Clebert Suconic >>>> http://community.jboss.org/people/clebert.suco...@jboss.com >>>> http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com >>>> >>>> >> >> > -- Clebert Suconic http://community.jboss.org/people/clebert.suco...@jboss.com http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com
