On Mon, 25 Jun 2012, Rafael Schloming wrote:
The fundamental issue here is that Qpid now needs to serve two
audiences. A very horizontal audience made up of pretty much anything
that might ever want to speak AMQP, and a more specialized, vertical
audience of people interested in a particular message broker.
I accept that we have distinct audiences. I'm not, however, at ease with
binding "Qpid" to "a particular message broker" and "Proton" to the
future, and there being only two things, the old and the new.
I'd like to see a scheme like below (beware silly made up names):
Qpid - Qpid is a leading implementor of AMQP; it has the following
components:
- Proton - Proton is an AMQP protocol engine for use by integrators
- Futon - Futon is a suite of messaging APIs [built on Proton]
- Halfton - Traditional back-office brokers [built on Proton]
In my view, the future of Qpid should be represented under the name "Qpid"
(with the brand redefinition that implies!), and things like Proton are
understood to be components of Qpid.
I suspect that if we don't create an agreed, understandable scheme for the
different parts, then development will go to one stream or another simply
by developer inertia.
Already, we have the new messenger API in Proton and the messaging API in
Qpid. How did you decide where to put it?
Justin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
