On Sat, Sep 25, 2010 at 10:58:28PM +0900, John Mettraux wrote:
> 
> On Sat, Sep 25, 2010 at 10:39:15PM +0900, John Mettraux wrote:
> > 
> > I have had a look at your ping/pong example.
> > 
> >   http://github.com/coffeeaddict/ruote-amqp-ping-pong
> > 
> > Congratulations for all the work ! I feel guilty because most of the work 
> > was induced by the lack of documentation in ruote[-amqp].
> > 
> > I have a few small remarks, please note that I completely understand that 
> > some of those remarks concern misunderstandings induced by lacks in 
> > documentation (and not lacking documentation) for which, as the project 
> > leader, I am responsible.
> > 
> > So :
> > 
> > - Storing the data into ruote_worker/ is a bit confusing for me, I was 
> > expecting to find some ruote worker code related in there. Maybe 
> > ruote_data/ or ruote_development_data/ ruote_production_data/ is a better 
> > folder name.
> 
> Oh, I completely forgot this one :
> 
> - It's a bit confusing to have ping/ and pong/ described as workers. In ruote 
> parlance, a worker is 'working' on executing processes, ping and pong are 
> participants, more like "consumers". Is your choice of the "worker" word here 
> induced by some of the ruote-amqp [lacking] documentation ?

No this is not induced by any of the documentation. It is 'worker' as
in a 'work-horse'. Mixing this in with the ruote lingo is confusing
indeed. I have changed it (be pushing soon)



Grtz,
Hartog.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply via email to