On 12/8/16 11:35 AM, Christian Schneider wrote:
I was not implying that the feature parity with ActiveMQ is a
marketing goal. I just wanted to show a case where typically in
companies marketing pushes for a major release based on a feature set
as they think they can sell it better. As an open source project
ActiveMQ/Artemis has the luxury to not being pushed by marketing.
+1
I currently do not see any bigger breaking API changes but I am not so
much into the Artemis internals. Until now I was only involved in the
OSGi support.
I also think it is very good to talk about the upcoming or planned
features. I would make the list rather small though as in my
experience the actual features going into the code often differ from
the plannings as quite many people are involved at apache projects and
the amount of work they put in often can not be predicted well. So I
would only look one or two minor versions ahead most of the time.
Yeah, agreed. I think my intention on feature parity is to draw some
focus to features that would be API breaking in an effort to have 2.0 be
a good on-ramp for the general non-early adopter user (things like
recently completed Virtual Topics and the addressing changes) as a
reasonable time frame would permit.
I put together a big list and I'll filter through it and create JIRAs so
a more directed conversation can continue.
Thanks,
-Matt
