Denis,
Yes, I plan to complete it by that time.
#Btw, RocketMQ first release (4.0.0) under Apache license is planned for this
month. Roman
On Thursday, January 12, 2017 7:30 AM, Denis Magda <[email protected]>
wrote:
Roman,
Makes perfect sense to me. Do you think we can release this feature in the
nearest AI release (1.9 or 2.0) around February/March?
—
Denis
> On Jan 10, 2017, at 7:57 PM, Roman Shtykh <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Denis,
> I think our Kafka integration is the closest to what may be required for
> RockerMQ. But also I wouldn't exclude expanding to Camel's approach in
> future, thanks a lot for pointing to it!
> Let's have it with other streamers as Yakov suggested, and let's discuss
> again if something fancy is requested ;)
> I will create a JIRA issue for that and ask RocketMQ developers for reviews
> and suggestions from their side. Roman
>
> On Wednesday, January 11, 2017 12:12 PM, Denis Magda <[email protected]>
>wrote:
>
>
> Roman,
>
> Does it make sense to have corresponding integration modules in both projects?
>
> For instance, there is Camel and Ignite integration that is hosted in both
> projects.
> https://github.com/apache/ignite/tree/master/modules/camel
> https://github.com/apache/camel/tree/master/components/camel-ignite
> <https://github.com/apache/camel/tree/master/components/camel-ignite>
>
> I do believe that the modules are not 100% identical and the reason it’s done
> this way might be because the modules use different Camel or Ignite
> interfaces and concepts. Is this approach somehow related to RocketMQ and
> Ignite?
>
> —
> Denis
>
>> On Jan 9, 2017, at 11:06 PM, Roman Shtykh <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> Igniters,
>> Recently I am looking into a new pub/sub messaging Apache incubator project
>> called RocketMQ [1], originally developed at Alibaba. And I am thinking
>> about implementing a streamer for Ignite.
>> Do you think it has to be placed under modules/ of Ignite project, or better
>> to have it together with other RocketMQ Community Projects [2]? I talked to
>> the project's lead -- any approach seems to be ok.
>> I anticipate quite frequent releases of the project this year (much more
>> frequent than Ignite's), and I think it will be easier to release such
>> integration updates with the 2nd approach, as soon as a new RocketMQ's (or
>> Ignite's) version is available.
>> Any thoughts?
>> [1] http://rocketmq.apache.org/[2] https://github.com/rocketmq
>> Roman
>
>
