On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 2:12 PM, Rob Godfrey <[email protected]> wrote:
> That's not unreasonable, except Futon and Halfton don't exist yet and
> I'm not sure that I know enough to say those will be precisely those
> three things. I'm certainly very comfortable pushing everything one
> level below Qpid and using Qpid as the uber-brand for "AMQP @ Apache"
> - that is very much my vision, at least.
1. As long as we position all components under the Qpid brand name,
I'm comfortable with leaving the details to be worked out as we evolve
these components.
2. I'm a bit worried about competing components under the Qpid brand
name. But I want to wait until we are clear about our strategy before
making an issue here.
3. Going forward we need to be clear to ourselves (the community)
first about our strategy, before announcing to a wider audience.
At the moment I'm a bit unclear about the following,
3.1 What the vision is going to be. "Qpid as the uber-brand for
"AMQP @ Apache" is nice, but perhaps too broad.
3.2 What are the "type" of components we are going to make
available and support.
3.3 What is our plan to get there.
We are a small community and already our resources are fragmented
across two brokers and language silos.
We have to identify what we can do and do well. We can't try to be
everything to everybody either, which would only serve to dilute the
quality of our products.
I think the time has come to make an effort to build some consensus
around the direction/goals/vision of this project.
It's easy when all our us are on one page.
Regards,
Rajith
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
