On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 12:13 AM, Carl Trieloff <[email protected]> wrote:
> If there are a lot of devs/ users that want it that and put the effort in > to build such a thing and maintain it, for > example create a c++ shim for JMS for RDMA/IB. And a strong community forms > then why not? > > I.e. Those that do have more say in the definition of the model, and the > debate conclusion should come > from those investigating into the module being invested in. I.e. if a set > of people show up and make IKVM > work and support it, why not? > > Does this invalidate another client that is also being actively maintained, > that is clearly no. I think the crux of this part of the issue is that we don't really have any policy/practicies for bringing in new code bases. In the past new clients have just been added by existing commiters with out much in the way of notice, debate or discussion. It's not really worked out well. Other Apache projects take these through the incubator, but that's mostly dealing with IP clearance. It doesn't really help prevent large code drops which are then basically abandoned. If we're going to avoid turning into the sourceforge of AMQP projects (something which I sometimes worry we're in danger of) we might want to think about this. :) It's particularly important where we're importing something which duplicates (fully or partially) existing functionality, if only so that the situation is sufficiently clear to people trying to make an informed decision about what best suits their needs. - Aidan -- Apache Qpid - AMQP, JMS, other messaging love http://qpid.apache.org "A witty saying proves nothing" - Voltaire --------------------------------------------------------------------- Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation Project: http://qpid.apache.org Use/Interact: mailto:[email protected]
