Hi Carl, > -----Original Message----- > From: Carl Trieloff [mailto:cctriel...@redhat.com] > > On 05/11/2010 04:28 PM, Steve Huston wrote: > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Gordon Sim [mailto:g...@redhat.com] > >> > >> On 05/10/2010 09:33 PM, tr...@apache.org wrote: > >> > >>> Author: tross > >>> Date: Mon May 10 20:33:19 2010 > >>> New Revision: 942892 > >>> > >>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=942892&view=rev > >>> Log: > >>> QPID-2589 - Applied patch from Chuck Rolke. > >>> > >> This commit adds a new component and yet another approach > for .net, > >> specifically a .net wrapper around the c++ messaging API. > >> > >> We also have a wcf client (this also uses some c++ code, > but uses the > >> 0-10 specific API plus some direct use of the internals of the > >> client), and two different pure c# clients for 0-8 and 0-10 > >> respectively. > >> > >> Four different options each with its own codebase isn't > sensible. We > >> can't maintain them all and it is confusing for users. > >> > > Right. This is nuts. > > > > > >> While aspects of this latest approach certainly appeal to me > >> personally (the messaging API is better for a number of > reasons than > >> the older API > >> and wrapping that also keeps the clients more aligned > >> conceptually), I > >> think it deserves a bit more debate. Specifically we have to > >> explicitly > >> decide as a community whether this new approach is a path we should > >> pursue. I'm keen to hear the thoughts of Cliff, Aidan and > other .net > >> aficionados. > >> > > I'm certainly not up to Cliff's level w/ .NET but I agree > with Gordon > > - this new approach is more elegant and probably more maintainable. > > However, nobody has discussed: > > > > - What about the older .NET component(s)? > > > > Deprecate them
I agree with this. > > - How might this affect WCF? > > > > The current WCF uses the 0-10 API, I would suggest moving the > WCF client to the updated C++ API. I believe this has been > agreed to be done at some point before on the list which > would then be consistent with this work Ok, as long as somebody is committed to follow through with it - the existing WCF was a sizeable effort. > > - Has anyone thought of how to package this? > > > > I would package in the same way we package QMF binding to C++ Ok... Again, someone needs to follow through with this. I don't have funding at this point to extend the installer for 0.8. > > - Does it have any documentation or tests? > > > > no idea.. Code without tests is a bad idea. I'd also say that new client/user code must have documentation too. -Steve --------------------------------------------------------------------- Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation Project: http://qpid.apache.org Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscr...@qpid.apache.org
