Very good point, Dan. Agreed.
Bruce
On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 12:07 PM, Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> It’s one thing to “support” the old keys and another thing entirely to
> make that the default and only option for developers to use right now. If
> I download the new release from Apache (having never been a HornetQ user)
> and start writing apps and such, I SHOULD be using AMQ* keys and
> properties, not HQ* keys. Thus, I think the patch needs to do something
> like:
>
> private static final SimpleString AMQ_PROPNAME = new SimpleString("_AMQ_”);
> @Deprecated
> private static final SimpleString HQ_PROPNAME = new SimpleString("_HQ_");
>
> and update the code to handle both at this point with plans to remove the
> HQ_ stuff at some point in the future.
>
> Does that make sense?
>
> Dan
>
>
> > On Apr 14, 2015, at 12:47 PM, Bruce Snyder <bruce.sny...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > I'm currently at ApacheCon working with Hiram and Clebert and I have
> > learned that the HornetQ project is now considered a legacy project --
> the
> > code is no longer maintained as the open source project HornetQ. The
> > expectation is to migrate the HornetQ user base to the ActiveMQ
> community.
> > We (the ActiveMQ community) still need to draft a plan of action for
> steps
> > to take with the HornetQ code donation, and I think that this could be
> one
> > of the things that is identified in that plan to help merge the two
> > communities. When combining communities in this manner, the goals of the
> > merger cannot be achieved without some level of compromise and I see this
> > is as a minor compromise. Therefore, I see no issue with providing
> backward
> > compatibility because it is a minor level of effort and yet it helps to
> > provide a migration path for users of HornetQ (the HornetQ community) to
> > make use of ActiveMQ <codename>.
> >
> > Bruce
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 11:30 AM, Tracy Snell <tsn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACTIVEMQ6-97 <
> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACTIVEMQ6-97> in the comments
> >> indicates that AMQ6 needs to provide legacy support for HornetQ. This
> is a
> >> surprise to me and I haven’t seen anything where this was mentioned as
> part
> >> of the plan (and it’s entirely possible I just missed it). So I’m just
> >> wanting clarification, with the HornetQ donation is ActiveMQ now
> required
> >> to provide legacy support for HornetQ clients?
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > perl -e 'print
> > unpack("u30","D0G)U8V4\@4VYY9&5R\"F)R=6-E+G-N>61E<D\!G;6%I;\"YC;VT*" );'
> >
> > ActiveMQ in Action: http://bit.ly/2je6cQ
> > Blog: http://bruceblog.org/
> > Twitter: http://twitter.com/brucesnyder
>
> --
> Daniel Kulp
> dk...@apache.org - http://dankulp.com/blog
> Talend Community Coder - http://coders.talend.com
>
>
--
perl -e 'print
unpack("u30","D0G)U8V4\@4VYY9&5R\"F)R=6-E+G-N>61E<D\!G;6%I;\"YC;VT*" );'
ActiveMQ in Action: http://bit.ly/2je6cQ
Blog: http://bruceblog.org/
Twitter: http://twitter.com/brucesnyder
