Steve Huston wrote:
Aidan Skinner wrote:
On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 1:24 PM, Carl Trieloff
<[email protected]> wrote:
If we could agree to get 0-10 into the Java Broker in a
timely fashion and
then change then
go to 1.0, I am fine with that. However, the 'M' is a pain
and if we don't
reach that point for
the next release I would prefer to go to 0.5 for the next
release.
I don't think that adding 0-10 support to the Java broker
is the only
step necessary before we declare ourselves 1.0. I'm not sure that
there's a consensus around what would be Qpid 1.0 just now.
What else do you feel is necessary?
I think the API consistency/ease-of-use is more of an issue than the
protocol compatibility.
For me it's all about interop across
the different languages, and the biggest part of that is 0-10
support in the Java broker.
Ok.
I'd also like to see some progress on protocol neutral
APIs in other languages, but I actually think thats an area
where we can whip things into shape with relatively little work.
I think that protocol-neutral API is going to end up a larger effort
than protocol implementation/interop. It ripples very far. It's also
what most newcomers will be affected most by as they start to look at
how to use Qpid for projects.
I certainly agree consistency and ease-of-use need to be a focus, but
for me the minimum bar for X.0 is that we can update the protocol
version without breaking deployed apps. The current APIs are mostly
there, but there are a few spots where they are a bit too close to the
wire and should have something slightly higher level in place. I think
once we achieve this level then consistency and ease-of-use can be done
with backwards compatible changes.
--Rafael
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
Project: http://qpid.apache.org
Use/Interact: mailto:[email protected]
