On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 10:54 AM, Robert Collins <robe...@robertcollins.net> wrote: ... > That means that if we want to use a different mq to rabbit we need a > reasonably compelling reason behind that: ideally one which other > projects would agree with and eventually migrate. > > Now, when folk @ Canonical started deploying message queues, rabbitmq > was basically 'it' - the 0mq schism came along later. > > As I see it we have a few questions to answer: > - should we invest $unknown_time in chasing this sporadic failure > down to ground > - should we look at getting a rabbit expert to help us? > - should we use rabbit? > - and if not rabbit, what then [and what is compellingly different]?
I don't have an opinion on any specific technology – I'm sadly too ignorant. However, please please please take the development momentum of the tools into account when we choose a tool. Rabbit, say, might not have something we need today, but if they've got fifty responsive people committing and releasing, they probably will soon enough. jml _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-dev Post to : launchpad-dev@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-dev More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
