Do we not already have precedent for something similar? NMS is a sub-project of ActiveMQ but includes support for non-ActiveMQ brokers.
> On Jun 9, 2017, at 8:39 AM, Timothy Bish <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 06/09/2017 09:04 AM, Clebert Suconic wrote: >> Yip. That's the idea. The connection pool was mentioned at the top from >> Michael. >> >> I'm just thinking if we could expand the scope a bit so we won't open a new >> incubatorb project for just two libraries. > > The initial scope as presented was > > {quote} > Some of these could be: > PooledConnectionFactory > Proposed custom serdes idea > Possible future kafka integrations > Etc. > {quote} > > Given you've got two concrete one sort of abstract and one etc it seems > there's some hints at there being more than just two libraries. The thing > I'd prefer not to do is to create stuff that gets hidden in the noise of the > ActiveMQ project which is to create a great messaging broker where it could > be something that can stand on its own and have its own community etc. > > It seems that some actual thought about what you are trying to achieve with > these proposed bits will help sort out where they should live. The natural > thing to do is create new ActiveMQ modules are subprojects but just because > it's easy to do that doesn't always mean its the best thing in the long run. > >> >> Someone could argue that a messaging integration library should live on >> Camel as the Messaging Integration project. > > Someone could argue that Camel already provides quite a bit of this.... > >> >> But I won't discuss much this now. I'm about to travel and won't be able >> to answer emails next week. >> >> >> >> On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 5:34 AM Andy Taylor <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> The JMS connection Pool currently in ActiveMQ could live there >>> >>> On 9 June 2017 at 04:52, Clebert Suconic <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> As long as we can define a bigger scope.. otherwise wouldn't be an >>>> overkill to start a project for this? >>>> >>>> What's the name? commons-messaging? >>>> >>>> >>>> but there's already a commons project within apache... >>>> >>>> >>>> I will be away for 2 weeks... Hope this to be sorted while I'm away .. >>>> .please??? >>>> >>>> >>>> Just kidding though.. if it's not sorted.. I may revisit this route as >>>> well. for now @michael use your or a new github account until we >>>> figure out where. >>>> >>>> >>>> On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 1:06 PM, Timothy Bish <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>>>> On 06/08/2017 11:21 AM, Michael André Pearce wrote: >>>>>> Hi All >>>>>> >>>>>> I would like to discuss proposing a new sub project , named >>>>>> "activemq-extras" >>>>>> >>>>>> There is some common / generic components not specific to activemq5 , >>>>>> artemis, qpid jms that currently live within or without some extras >>>> project >>>>>> would end up living in one. >>>>>> >>>>>> Some of these could be: >>>>>> PooledConnectionFactory >>>>>> Proposed custom serdes idea >>>>>> Possible future kafka integrations >>>>>> Etc. >>>>> >>>>> Given the scope outlined here as well as the aspiration to make this a >>>> cross >>>>> cutting set of features that work with clients that aren't part of >>>> ActiveMQ >>>>> land but just JMS clients in general then I'd lean towards a -1 of >>>> creating >>>>> a new subproject or building new modules into Artemis that provide >>> these >>>>> features. >>>>> >>>>> My suggestion would be to go the route of an incubator project where >>> you >>>>> could work out the goals as aspirations of this new project and build a >>>>> community around that. I think there would be more willingness from >>>> folks >>>>> that aren't ActiveMQ centric developers to contribute to a project that >>>>> lives on it's own given the current goal seems to be that it's >>> something >>>>> that works with many different JMS client implementations, most of >>> which >>>>> aren't ActiveMQ.... >>>>> >>>>> Have a look at the incubator process (http://incubator.apache.org/) I >>>> think >>>>> it lends itself to what's being proposed here more so than just >>> spinning >>>> up >>>>> a subproject and starting to write some code. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> The idea then is these "extras" are generic in fact they can be >>>>>> released independently, >>>>>> don't affect the core products >>>>>> are generic meaning they can be re-used. >>>>>> Optional for end users to use. >>>>>> >>>>>> Cheers >>>>>> Mike >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Sent from my iPhone >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Tim Bish >>>>> twitter: @tabish121 >>>>> blog: http://timbish.blogspot.com/ >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Clebert Suconic >>>> > > -- > Tim Bish > twitter: @tabish121 > blog: http://timbish.blogspot.com/ >
