yep, so far the best name is ActiveMQ-Artemis-native

I don't think this is a big deal and I don't intend to create a vote
for this.. as this is regular business. We are creating a separate
repository for the native part, not a project!

Let me know If you anyone think I'm wrong and this needs a vote please.

On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 1:59 PM Arthur Naseef <a...@amlinv.com> wrote:
>
> That makes sense then - having a separate repo and release cycle for the
> native JNI library.
>
> Perhaps, as Jeff suggested, ActiveMQ-Artemis-native would be a good name?
>
> Art
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 10:04 AM Clebert Suconic <clebert.suco...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > forgot to answer another point.
> >
> > Right now it's for posix (Linux) only. but that could change as the
> > project progresses.
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 11:51 AM Clebert Suconic
> > <clebert.suco...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > -- If the library is intended as a holder for "any JNI needed by
> > Artemis,"
> > > then I don't see value in dis-associating it from Artemis.  OTOH, if the
> > > library has functionality that could be useful to other projects, outside
> > > of Artemis, then I can see a value to breaking it away from the Artemis
> > > name and making it more reusable.
> > >
> > >
> > > I thought about the possibility of dis-associating. .but you're right..
> > it's a bit more complicated... I wouldn't disassociate.
> > >
> > >
> > > >>>>  I don't have a concern either way on that front.  Although I am
> > not sure why it helps to do so.
> > >
> > >
> > > This is a chicken / egg situation. Right now when we build the native
> > layer, we have to commit binary file on the git repository.
> > > I'm intending to fix that part.
> > >
> > > And that makes it difficult to have a real build from source experience.
> > I have had a few cases where users needed to rebuild it from scratch, and
> > bumped into this native issue, which I'm trying to improve here.
> > >
> > > The native layer build wouldn't have any .so, and the .so would be part
> > of the release.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 12:36 AM Arthur Naseef <a...@amlinv.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> JNI is a broad category - which really just means calling out from Java
> > to
> > >> native O/S libraries.
> > >>
> > >> If the library is intended as a holder for "any JNI needed by Artemis,"
> > >> then I don't see value in dis-associating it from Artemis.  OTOH, if the
> > >> library has functionality that could be useful to other projects,
> > outside
> > >> of Artemis, then I can see a value to breaking it away from the Artemis
> > >> name and making it more reusable.
> > >>
> > >> As for making it a separate repo with its own lifecycle, I don't have a
> > >> concern either way on that front.  Although I am not sure why it helps
> > to
> > >> do so.  Well, one question comes to mind - isn't this library Linux, or
> > >> Posix, specific?  Or, does it build on all systems that might be used to
> > >> build Artemis?
> > >>
> > >> Art
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 9:52 PM Clebert Suconic <
> > clebert.suco...@gmail.com>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > Currently it’s used for JNi operations around storage.  Mostly
> > libido.  But
> > >> > I foresee being used for other cases where we may need JNI.
> > >> >
> > >> > On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 5:53 PM Arthur Naseef <a...@amlinv.com> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > > What is in the library?
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Art
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > > On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 11:08 AM Clebert Suconic <
> > >> > > clebert.suco...@gmail.com>
> > >> > > wrote:
> > >> > >
> > >> > > > I thought Since the native project had open scope like I'm
> > proposing,
> > >> > > > it would eventually be useful anywhere that needs a JNI library.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > But we can go with activemq-artemis-native. That's fine.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 12:51 PM jgenender <jgenen...@apache.org>
> > >> > wrote:
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Hey Clebert,
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > This is really cool stuff.  But I don't like it being called
> > >> > > > ActiveMQ-native
> > >> > > > > because it will confuse people with ActiveMQ classic (which
> > really is
> > >> > > > > ActiveMQ for now) or that it would even work with ActiveMQ
> > 5.x.  I
> > >> > > would
> > >> > > > > recommend retaining the Artemis in the name, or
> > >> > > ActiveMQ-Artemis-native.
> > >> > > > > If/when Artemis becomes ActiveMQ, then that could certainly be
> > an
> > >> > > option
> > >> > > > to
> > >> > > > > drop Artemis. But at this stage I think its too confusing.
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Jeff
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > --
> > >> > > > > Sent from:
> > >> > > > http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ActiveMQ-Dev-f2368404.html
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > --
> > >> > > > Clebert Suconic
> > >> > > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > --
> > >> > Clebert Suconic
> > >> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Clebert Suconic
> >



-- 
Clebert Suconic

Reply via email to