The discussion is moving to general at incubator.apache.org http://incubator.apache.org/guides/lists.html
If other people is backing up this.. than I'm all up for it... so, if you support this, by that I mean.. if you want to get involved.. then it's a good time to show you interest on that thread: https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/14bdf3d93c8c6ac3ac7dd9c1d6e6146fd90991581d80e8c6cfaf9540@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 12:46 PM, Clebert Suconic <[email protected]> wrote: > I think it will make sense a different project... > > for instance: if we make journal a pluggable component there, we could > have a JournalQueue and JournalHashMap to support some sort of client > side persistence.. > > @John: you're the man here.. how we can get this rolling? > > On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 2:31 PM, John D. Ament <[email protected]> wrote: >> Plenty of commons projects use git... https://github.com/apache?q=commons >> >> John >> >> On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 2:27 PM Clebert Suconic <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> One extra reason to not use commons: >>> >>> >>> SVN :) >>> >>> >>> How would we proceed? Since this is a new project I don't think we need a >>> vote here at activemq right? >>> >>> On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 2:19 PM Clebert Suconic <[email protected] >>> > >>> wrote: >>> >>> > On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 2:16 PM John D. Ament <[email protected]> >>> > wrote: >>> > >>> >> Well, in theory you could create an Apache Messaging Components project >>> >> that was made up a variety of small projects like this. >>> >> >>> >> For Kafka-JMS, I would strongly encourage you to work with the Kafka >>> >> Community to bring this to them first instead of creating a new project. >>> > >>> > >>> > Sure. >>> > That was just a rhetorical possibility. Didn't mean to list exact >>> > projects now. Just trying to determine in what direction this could go. >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> >> >>> >> John >>> >> >>> >> On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 2:12 PM Clebert Suconic < >>> >> [email protected]> >>> >> wrote: >>> >> >>> >> > There would be possibly a few smaller projects >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> >> > For now I can see at least 3. >>> >> > >>> >> > Pool >>> >> > Serialialization avro >>> >> > Kafka-JMS Integration. >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> >> > It would be beyond the scope of commons I think. Unless they are ok >>> with >>> >> > many small projects. >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> >> > In the past I wanted to spinof the journal and libaio separately also. >>> >> > Could we make this in this context of a new project ? >>> >> > >>> >> > Iif we made it something like messaging-tools these could all fit in >>> the >>> >> > same sub project?. >>> >> > >>> >> > On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 1:52 PM John D. Ament <[email protected]> >>> >> > wrote: >>> >> > >>> >> > > We can definitely try an incubating project, if it makes sense for >>> >> this >>> >> > to >>> >> > > be an eventual TLP or subproject. However, I was wondering if >>> Apache >>> >> > > Commons was a possible location for this project? They tend to run >>> >> with >>> >> > ad >>> >> > > hoc smallish projects with a single PMC with enough oversight to cut >>> >> > valid >>> >> > > releases. Their projects are generally smaller, utility libraries >>> and >>> >> > the >>> >> > > core inners of projects. >>> >> > > >>> >> > > Let me know if you want to proceed with incubation. We'd need to >>> dig >>> >> up >>> >> > > some mentors for the project. >>> >> > > >>> >> > > John >>> >> > > >>> >> > > On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 6:48 PM Timothy Bish <[email protected]> >>> >> wrote: >>> >> > > >>> >> > > > On 06/09/2017 09:58 AM, Matt Pavlovich wrote: >>> >> > > > > Do we not already have precedent for something similar? NMS is >>> a >>> >> > > > sub-project of ActiveMQ but includes support for non-ActiveMQ >>> >> brokers. >>> >> > > > >>> >> > > > The NMS bits aren't quite the same as this as the initial goal of >>> >> that >>> >> > > > was to create a .NET based ActiveMQ client and it sort of morphed >>> >> out >>> >> > > > from there. There are some similarities though and in those you >>> can >>> >> > > > kind of see the problem of putting a bunch of non-ActiveMQ type >>> bits >>> >> > > > under and ActiveMQ subproject. The NMS project has never grown >>> >> much of >>> >> > > > a community of developers to support all the various client >>> >> > > > implementations, there's many just two people who contribute. As >>> >> such >>> >> > > > the project has mostly died, there hasn't been any releases in a >>> >> long >>> >> > > > time, an some of the implementations have never seen an official >>> >> > release >>> >> > > > as there was nobody to manage it. I felt for a long time like NMS >>> >> > would >>> >> > > > have been better served as it's own project but my desire to work >>> on >>> >> > > > .NET code is quite low so I never pushed to move it to incubator >>> but >>> >> > > > really that's what should have happened in my mind. >>> >> > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> > > > >> 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/ >>> >> > > > >> >>> >> > > > > >>> >> > > > >>> >> > > > -- >>> >> > > > Tim Bish >>> >> > > > twitter: @tabish121 >>> >> > > > blog: http://timbish.blogspot.com/ >>> >> > > > >>> >> > > > >>> >> > > >>> >> > -- >>> >> > Clebert Suconic >>> >> > >>> >> >>> > -- >>> > Clebert Suconic >>> > >>> -- >>> Clebert Suconic >>> > > > > -- > Clebert Suconic -- Clebert Suconic
